[katello-devel] Katello-Foreman-Aeolus Integration

[Bryan Kearney]

On 06/27/2012 08:45 AM, Ohad Levy wrote:
> On 06/27/2012 03:07 PM, Chris Alfonso wrote:
>> On 27/06/12 09:18 +0300, Ohad Levy wrote:
>>> On 06/26/2012 10:11 PM, Chris Alfonso wrote:
>>>> There has been a bit of discussion going on around how we might go
>>>> about
>>>> using foreman's ability to do host provisioning with aeolus and
>>>> katello.
>>>> I've published some of the notes from the discussions here:
>>>> http://etherpad-aeolusproject.rhcloud.com/p/Katello-Foreman-Aeolus-Integration-Summary
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://etherpad-aeolusproject.rhcloud.com/p/Katello-Foreman-Aeolus-Integration
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The suggested end goal of this integration is:
>>>> 1) Allow Katello to clone content, create a snapshot of the content
>>>> (Content View).
>>>> 2) Generate the data needed for an Oz template and store it with the
>>>> Foreman HostGroups.
>>>> 3) Allow Aeolus to provision guests *and* be able to use the Foreman
>>>> capabilities around post-boot configuration.
>>>>
>>>> If there are additional goals to this integration that I've overlooked
>>>> and you know about them, please respond with your intel. Take a look at
>>>> the use cases, and feel free to annotate or reply to this thread.
>>>
>>> One major difference, is the ability to manage the system in the long
>>> term as well, so its not really just about launching it, rather
>>> managing its configuration for the whole system life cycle.
>>>
>>> other side benefits, is to manage stuff you need in your enterprise
>>> but dont need on a common cloud, things like ip address management,
>>> dns, dhcp, automation of puppet certificates, status
>>> reporting,inventory auditing etc.
>> These are core foreman capabilities offered in the latest code base and
>> not necessarily features that will be integrated with katello or
>> conductor. In other words, a user would go directly to foreman to manage
>> these features, correct?
>
> While I personally don't mind, I think the goal is that users don't
> login directly into foreman, rather we expose it via CE/SE.
>
> I would expect a lot of these features showing up in Katello, and for
> the record, you can't easily provision lots of system in rhevm via CE
> without dns and ip management support ( or at least subnets / networking).

Agree... the expectation is that Katello provides a light unification 
layer over foreman, pulp, and candlepin. I would expect two things:

1) all the heavy lifting is done in foreman
2) the foreman ui also gets any new features we need in katello. This 
means double effort, but gets the features out to the foreman community 
for maturity.

-- bk