[dev] libcloud-vagrant: A compute provider using Vagrant

[Carlos Valiente <su...@gmail.com>]

Hi! I have just released version 0.1.0 of libcloud-vagrant, a compute
provider for Apache Libcloud which uses Vagrant and VirtualBox to
create nodes, networks and volumes:

    https://github.com/carletes/libcloud-vagrant


C

Re: [dev] libcloud-vagrant: A compute provider using Vagrant

["Kaldawi, Michael" <mi...@verizon.com>]

Markos,

Great documentation. Thank you very much for your invaluable contribution.
Your guide answers many questions and uncertainties.

Best Regards,
Michael

On 7/22/14, 11:03 AM, "Markos Gogoulos" <mg...@mist.io> wrote:

> 
>
>Hi Michael, 
>
>I've written a post on how to create a libcloud
>compute driver from scratch, hope it helps
>
>
>http://blog.mist.io/post/67366170830/how-to-create-a-libcloud-driver-from-
>scratch
>
>
>???? 22.07.2014 17:36, Kaldawi, Michael ??????:
>
>> Hi John,
>> 
>>
>Thanks for your guidance. I am new to Libcloud, and would appreciate
>the
>> code reviews. I agree with you; I think that building a core
>driver for
>> VCC is a sensible course of action.
>> 
>> To get started
>with the driver, is there a specific list of files I need
>> to modify
>from the Git repos? So far, I have noted the following for
>> editing:
>(essentially, just adding the VCC names)
>>
>Libcloud.compute.providers.py
>> Libcloud.compute.types.py
>> 
>> To get
>started with the Verizon Cloud Compute driver I plan to create:
>>
>Libcloud.common.verizon.py (provides authentication headers and
>>
>handles requests)
>> Libcloud.compute.drivers.vcc.py (driver for VCC;
>resource management on
>> cloud resources)
>>
>Libcloud.test.copmute.test_vcc.py (test cases and runs on vcc.py
>>
>functions)
>> 
>> I am completely new to Libcloud, so if I am missing
>essential
>> modifications or necessary files, please let me know. I am
>doing my best
>> to follow coding conventions and Libcloud standards, but
>if anything I am
>> doing seems weird, please shoot me a message.
>> 
>>
>Thanks,
>> Michael Kaldawi
>> 
>> On 7/21/14, 5:48 PM, "John Carr"
><jo...@unrouted.co.uk> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Michael, As a developer and
>end user I personally prefer providers that are 'upstream'. Carlos has
>made the right choice with libcloud-vagrant. I'd love to see something
>like that in core when it is ready, but getting the semantics right will
>be trickier than a normal cloud driver so it makes sense to let it
>mature externally. For a straight http based cloud compute driver i'd
>expect it to make more sense to aim to go straight upstream. In
>particular, if you are new to libcloud the code review will be very
>valuable. And by being a core driver your tests will be run and be
>expected to pass before releases are made. So a new libcloud release is
>far less likely to break VCC support if its in core than if it was
>packaged seperately. Cheers, John On 21 Jul 2014, at 21:50, Kaldawi,
>Michael <mi...@verizon.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Carlos, Thanks a
>bunch for your very complete response and quick turnaround time. Your
>answers are very helpful, and they will help me create a model for the
>VCC (Verizon Cloud Compute) driver. I will continue to ask questions on
>this email list as I analyze current Libcloud drivers and develop my
>own. I greatly appreciate any assistance. Thanks again Carlos, Michael
>Kaldawi On 7/21/14, 3:30 PM, "Carlos Valiente" <su...@gmail.com>
>wrote: 
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi, Michael! 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 1. Why is your
>libcloud-vagrant driver not in the Libcloud repo?
>>>>> Mainly because I
>don't know whether the Libcloud guys (or anyone else) might be
>interested at all in libcloud-vagrant, so I started working on it under
>my personal Github account. I'm using libcloud-vagrant at work, and I
>need to update it frequently (I have just released version 0.2.0, for
>instance, since the deployment support in the initial release was badly
>broken). The release process of Apache Libcloud is much slower
>(understandably), so it would not be a good choice for me until
>libcloud-vagrant stabilizes.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Is it common practice to
>release the first version outside of the libcloud repo?
>>>>> I'm not
>sure about that --- someone else in this list will definitely be able to
>answer!
>
> 

Re: [dev] libcloud-vagrant: A compute provider using Vagrant

[Markos Gogoulos <mg...@mist.io>]

 

Hi Michael, 

I've written a post on how to create a libcloud
compute driver from scratch, hope it helps


http://blog.mist.io/post/67366170830/how-to-create-a-libcloud-driver-from-scratch


Στις 22.07.2014 17:36, Kaldawi, Michael έγραψε: 

> Hi John,
> 
>
Thanks for your guidance. I am new to Libcloud, and would appreciate
the
> code reviews. I agree with you; I think that building a core
driver for
> VCC is a sensible course of action.
> 
> To get started
with the driver, is there a specific list of files I need
> to modify
from the Git repos? So far, I have noted the following for
> editing:
(essentially, just adding the VCC names)
>
Libcloud.compute.providers.py
> Libcloud.compute.types.py
> 
> To get
started with the Verizon Cloud Compute driver I plan to create:
>
Libcloud.common.verizon.py (provides authentication headers and
>
handles requests)
> Libcloud.compute.drivers.vcc.py (driver for VCC;
resource management on
> cloud resources)
>
Libcloud.test.copmute.test_vcc.py (test cases and runs on vcc.py
>
functions)
> 
> I am completely new to Libcloud, so if I am missing
essential
> modifications or necessary files, please let me know. I am
doing my best
> to follow coding conventions and Libcloud standards, but
if anything I am
> doing seems weird, please shoot me a message.
> 
>
Thanks,
> Michael Kaldawi
> 
> On 7/21/14, 5:48 PM, "John Carr"
<jo...@unrouted.co.uk> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Michael, As a developer and
end user I personally prefer providers that are 'upstream'. Carlos has
made the right choice with libcloud-vagrant. I'd love to see something
like that in core when it is ready, but getting the semantics right will
be trickier than a normal cloud driver so it makes sense to let it
mature externally. For a straight http based cloud compute driver i'd
expect it to make more sense to aim to go straight upstream. In
particular, if you are new to libcloud the code review will be very
valuable. And by being a core driver your tests will be run and be
expected to pass before releases are made. So a new libcloud release is
far less likely to break VCC support if its in core than if it was
packaged seperately. Cheers, John On 21 Jul 2014, at 21:50, Kaldawi,
Michael <mi...@verizon.com> wrote: 
>> 
>>> Carlos, Thanks a
bunch for your very complete response and quick turnaround time. Your
answers are very helpful, and they will help me create a model for the
VCC (Verizon Cloud Compute) driver. I will continue to ask questions on
this email list as I analyze current Libcloud drivers and develop my
own. I greatly appreciate any assistance. Thanks again Carlos, Michael
Kaldawi On 7/21/14, 3:30 PM, "Carlos Valiente" <su...@gmail.com>
wrote: 
>>> 
>>>> Hi, Michael! 
>>>> 
>>>>> 1. Why is your
libcloud-vagrant driver not in the Libcloud repo?
>>>> Mainly because I
don't know whether the Libcloud guys (or anyone else) might be
interested at all in libcloud-vagrant, so I started working on it under
my personal Github account. I'm using libcloud-vagrant at work, and I
need to update it frequently (I have just released version 0.2.0, for
instance, since the deployment support in the initial release was badly
broken). The release process of Apache Libcloud is much slower
(understandably), so it would not be a good choice for me until
libcloud-vagrant stabilizes. 
>>>> 
>>>>> Is it common practice to
release the first version outside of the libcloud repo?
>>>> I'm not
sure about that --- someone else in this list will definitely be able to
answer!

 

Re: [dev] libcloud-vagrant: A compute provider using Vagrant

["Kaldawi, Michael" <mi...@verizon.com>]

Hi John,

Thanks for your guidance. I am new to Libcloud, and would appreciate the
code reviews. I agree with you; I think that building a core driver for
VCC is a sensible course of action.

To get started with the driver, is there a specific list of files I need
to modify from the Git repos? So far, I have noted the following for
editing: (essentially, just adding the VCC names)
Libcloud.compute.providers.py
Libcloud.compute.types.py


To get started with the Verizon Cloud Compute driver I plan to create:
Libcloud.common.verizon.py         (provides authentication headers and
handles requests)
Libcloud.compute.drivers.vcc.py    (driver for VCC; resource management on
cloud resources)
Libcloud.test.copmute.test_vcc.py  (test cases and runs on vcc.py
functions)

I am completely new to Libcloud, so if I am missing essential
modifications or necessary files, please let me know. I am doing my best
to follow coding conventions and Libcloud standards, but if anything I am
doing seems weird, please shoot me a message.

Thanks,
Michael Kaldawi


On 7/21/14, 5:48 PM, "John Carr" <jo...@unrouted.co.uk> wrote:

>Hi Michael,
>
>As a developer and end user I personally prefer providers that are
>'upstream’.
>
>Carlos has made the right choice with libcloud-vagrant. I’d love to see
>something like that in core when it is ready, but getting the semantics
>right will be trickier than a normal cloud driver so it makes sense to
>let it mature externally.
>
>For a straight http based cloud compute driver i’d expect it to make more
>sense to aim to go straight upstream. In particular, if you are new to
>libcloud the code review will be very valuable. And by being a core
>driver your tests will be run and be expected to pass before releases are
>made. So a new libcloud release is far less likely to break VCC support
>if its in core than if it was packaged seperately.
>
>Cheers,
>John
>
>On 21 Jul 2014, at 21:50, Kaldawi, Michael <mi...@verizon.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Carlos,
>> 
>> Thanks a bunch for your very complete response and quick turnaround
>>time.
>> Your answers are very helpful, and they will help me create a model for
>> the VCC (Verizon Cloud Compute) driver.
>> 
>> I will continue to ask questions on this email list as I analyze current
>> Libcloud drivers and develop my own. I greatly appreciate any
>>assistance.
>> 
>> Thanks again Carlos,
>> Michael Kaldawi
>> 
>> 
>> On 7/21/14, 3:30 PM, "Carlos Valiente" <su...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi, Michael!
>>> 
>>>> 1. Why is your libcloud-vagrant driver not in the Libcloud repo?
>>> 
>>> Mainly because I don't know whether the Libcloud guys (or anyone else)
>>> might be interested at all in libcloud-vagrant, so I started working
>>> on it under my personal Github account.
>>> 
>>> I'm using libcloud-vagrant at work, and I need to update it frequently
>>> (I have just released version 0.2.0, for instance, since the
>>> deployment support in the initial release was badly broken). The
>>> release process of Apache Libcloud is much slower (understandably), so
>>> it would not be a good choice for me until libcloud-vagrant
>>> stabilizes.
>>> 
>>>> Is it common practice to release the first version outside of the
>>>> libcloud repo?
>>> 
>>> I'm not sure about that --- someone else in this list will definitely
>>> be able to answer!
>>> 
>>>> Did you follow the libcloud coding standards?
>>> 
>>> I tried to, yes --- they're very sensible: PEP 8, common idioms ... so
>>> it's for your own benefit to follow them.
>>> 
>>>> 2. Will you be listed as a ³Third Party Provider² on the Libcloud
>>>> developers page?
>>> 
>>> I should ask for that, yes.
>>> 
>>>> 3. Are there any things you wish you knew when you started writing the
>>>> driver that you now know?
>>> 
>>> I would have tried to run my first scripts using both my Vagrant
>>> provider and another one, to make sure I got the sematics write (which
>>> I'm sure I haven't, since I did not check). Having an exhaustive test
>>> suite with about 90% coverage has been very helpful, too.
>>> 
>>> C
>> 
>

Re: [dev] libcloud-vagrant: A compute provider using Vagrant

[John Carr <jo...@unrouted.co.uk>]

Hi Michael,

As a developer and end user I personally prefer providers that are 'upstream’.

Carlos has made the right choice with libcloud-vagrant. I’d love to see something like that in core when it is ready, but getting the semantics right will be trickier than a normal cloud driver so it makes sense to let it mature externally.

For a straight http based cloud compute driver i’d expect it to make more sense to aim to go straight upstream. In particular, if you are new to libcloud the code review will be very valuable. And by being a core driver your tests will be run and be expected to pass before releases are made. So a new libcloud release is far less likely to break VCC support if its in core than if it was packaged seperately.

Cheers,
John

On 21 Jul 2014, at 21:50, Kaldawi, Michael <mi...@verizon.com> wrote:

> Carlos,
> 
> Thanks a bunch for your very complete response and quick turnaround time.
> Your answers are very helpful, and they will help me create a model for
> the VCC (Verizon Cloud Compute) driver.
> 
> I will continue to ask questions on this email list as I analyze current
> Libcloud drivers and develop my own. I greatly appreciate any assistance.
> 
> Thanks again Carlos,
> Michael Kaldawi
> 
> 
> On 7/21/14, 3:30 PM, "Carlos Valiente" <su...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi, Michael!
>> 
>>> 1. Why is your libcloud-vagrant driver not in the Libcloud repo?
>> 
>> Mainly because I don't know whether the Libcloud guys (or anyone else)
>> might be interested at all in libcloud-vagrant, so I started working
>> on it under my personal Github account.
>> 
>> I'm using libcloud-vagrant at work, and I need to update it frequently
>> (I have just released version 0.2.0, for instance, since the
>> deployment support in the initial release was badly broken). The
>> release process of Apache Libcloud is much slower (understandably), so
>> it would not be a good choice for me until libcloud-vagrant
>> stabilizes.
>> 
>>> Is it common practice to release the first version outside of the
>>> libcloud repo?
>> 
>> I'm not sure about that --- someone else in this list will definitely
>> be able to answer!
>> 
>>> Did you follow the libcloud coding standards?
>> 
>> I tried to, yes --- they're very sensible: PEP 8, common idioms ... so
>> it's for your own benefit to follow them.
>> 
>>> 2. Will you be listed as a ³Third Party Provider² on the Libcloud
>>> developers page?
>> 
>> I should ask for that, yes.
>> 
>>> 3. Are there any things you wish you knew when you started writing the
>>> driver that you now know?
>> 
>> I would have tried to run my first scripts using both my Vagrant
>> provider and another one, to make sure I got the sematics write (which
>> I'm sure I haven't, since I did not check). Having an exhaustive test
>> suite with about 90% coverage has been very helpful, too.
>> 
>> C
> 

Re: [dev] libcloud-vagrant: A compute provider using Vagrant

["Kaldawi, Michael" <mi...@verizon.com>]

Carlos,

Thanks a bunch for your very complete response and quick turnaround time.
Your answers are very helpful, and they will help me create a model for
the VCC (Verizon Cloud Compute) driver.

I will continue to ask questions on this email list as I analyze current
Libcloud drivers and develop my own. I greatly appreciate any assistance.

Thanks again Carlos,
Michael Kaldawi


On 7/21/14, 3:30 PM, "Carlos Valiente" <su...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Hi, Michael!
>
>> 1. Why is your libcloud-vagrant driver not in the Libcloud repo?
>
>Mainly because I don't know whether the Libcloud guys (or anyone else)
>might be interested at all in libcloud-vagrant, so I started working
>on it under my personal Github account.
>
>I'm using libcloud-vagrant at work, and I need to update it frequently
>(I have just released version 0.2.0, for instance, since the
>deployment support in the initial release was badly broken). The
>release process of Apache Libcloud is much slower (understandably), so
>it would not be a good choice for me until libcloud-vagrant
>stabilizes.
>
>> Is it common practice to release the first version outside of the
>>libcloud repo?
>
>I'm not sure about that --- someone else in this list will definitely
>be able to answer!
>
>> Did you follow the libcloud coding standards?
>
>I tried to, yes --- they're very sensible: PEP 8, common idioms ... so
>it's for your own benefit to follow them.
>
>> 2. Will you be listed as a ³Third Party Provider² on the Libcloud
>> developers page?
>
>I should ask for that, yes.
>
>> 3. Are there any things you wish you knew when you started writing the
>> driver that you now know?
>
>I would have tried to run my first scripts using both my Vagrant
>provider and another one, to make sure I got the sematics write (which
>I'm sure I haven't, since I did not check). Having an exhaustive test
>suite with about 90% coverage has been very helpful, too.
>
>C

Re: [dev] libcloud-vagrant: A compute provider using Vagrant

[Carlos Valiente <su...@gmail.com>]

Hi, Michael!

> 1. Why is your libcloud-vagrant driver not in the Libcloud repo?

Mainly because I don't know whether the Libcloud guys (or anyone else)
might be interested at all in libcloud-vagrant, so I started working
on it under my personal Github account.

I'm using libcloud-vagrant at work, and I need to update it frequently
(I have just released version 0.2.0, for instance, since the
deployment support in the initial release was badly broken). The
release process of Apache Libcloud is much slower (understandably), so
it would not be a good choice for me until libcloud-vagrant
stabilizes.

> Is it common practice to release the first version outside of the libcloud repo?

I'm not sure about that --- someone else in this list will definitely
be able to answer!

> Did you follow the libcloud coding standards?

I tried to, yes --- they're very sensible: PEP 8, common idioms ... so
it's for your own benefit to follow them.

> 2. Will you be listed as a ³Third Party Provider² on the Libcloud
> developers page?

I should ask for that, yes.

> 3. Are there any things you wish you knew when you started writing the
> driver that you now know?

I would have tried to run my first scripts using both my Vagrant
provider and another one, to make sure I got the sematics write (which
I'm sure I haven't, since I did not check). Having an exhaustive test
suite with about 90% coverage has been very helpful, too.

C

Re: [dev] libcloud-vagrant: A compute provider using Vagrant

["Kaldawi, Michael" <mi...@verizon.com>]

Hi Carlos,

I am developing a Python driver for Verizon Cloud Compute, and I just had
a couple questions about getting started with Libcloud. I hope you can
help me out.

1. Why is your libcloud-vagrant driver not in the Libcloud repo?  Is it
common practice to release the first version outside of the libcloud repo?
Did you follow the libcloud coding standards?
2. Will you be listed as a ³Third Party Provider² on the Libcloud
developers page?
3. Are there any things you wish you knew when you started writing the
driver that you now know?

About me: I am an intern at Verizon Enterprise Services for the summer. I
am writing a Python driver for the Verizon Cloud Compute IaaS. I am hoping
to leave behind an ongoing open-source project when I leave, and Libcloud
would allow me to do that.¹


If you see helping me, that would be awesome. Thanks!

Best Regards,
Michael Kaldawi
Partner Integration Engineering Intern
Verizon Enterprise Services


On 7/19/14, 12:03 PM, "Carlos Valiente" <su...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Hi! I have just released version 0.1.0 of libcloud-vagrant, a compute
>provider for Apache Libcloud which uses Vagrant and VirtualBox to
>create nodes, networks and volumes:
>
>    https://github.com/carletes/libcloud-vagrant
>
>
>C