[Fiware-cloud] contribution of portal features

[Alex Glikson]

Thanks, Alvaro.

So, given the technology incompatibility, it seems that direct 
contributions to Horizon would not be effective -- the functional 
differences (in the context of capabilities that exist in both) are minor, 
and even if we contribute, the outcomes can not be reused in the context 
of FIWARE.
Moreover, given that the unique portal features are primarily targeting 
backend capabilities which are not likely to become part of OpenStack 
(data, apps, FIWARE Lab, etc), it doesn't seem like a good idea to 
contribute FIWARE Portal 'as is' to OpenStack (as a new project).
Correct? Other opinions?

Thanks,
Alex

====================================================================================
Alex Glikson
Senior Researcher, Cloud Solutions for IoT, IBM Research - Haifa; IBM Lead 
for FIWARE
Email: glikson at il.ibm.com | Skype: alex.glikson | Phone: +972-4-8281085 | 
Mobile: +972-54-6466667




From:   Álvaro Alonso <aalonsog at dit.upm.es>
To:     Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM at IBMIL
Cc:     Kenneth Nagin/Haifa/IBM at IBMIL, fiware-cloud at lists.fiware.org
Date:   09/06/2016 12:53 PM
Subject:        Re: [Fiware-cloud] contribution of portal features



Hi Alex, I will try to answer your questions: 


1. Underlying technology (I haven't been following the recent developments 
in OpenStack around incorporation of client-side technologies) - how 
(in)compatible the two are?

Last information we have about this is that they have plans of switching 
the current Horizon implementation to AngularJS technology in the future. 
However, there was a part of the community that didn?t agree with this 
change. On the other hand, and assuming they finally accept the change, 
the process would be hard so I don?t think it would be ready in medium 
term. Perhaps, Joaquín can share the last news regarding this.

As you know, we currently use Backbone.js in our portal. Both of them 
(Angular and Backbone) are client-side MVC models, but as the technologies 
are different, the hypothetical migration from one to the other would not 
be trivial. 

2. Features

- Features related with the main Openstack services are mainly the same in 
both portals. The substancial difference we had until now was the support 
of PaaS Manager and SDC features. As they now offer Murano as application 
manager component and we are adapting Cloud Portal to support it,  this 
difference is not as important as before. However, the way in which we 
manage Murano resources in the portal is a little bit different and 
perhaps better from the user point of view. 

- We offer OAuth2 support.

- The UI and UX we have is more user friendly than the one Horizon offers 
and thanks to the client-side technology the interaction is more agile and 
dynamic. 

- In the Cloud Portal we manage several things related with FIWARE Lab 
environment: 
Account types (community, trial, basic)
Terms and conditions app
Sanity checks app (to check nodes status)
Google Analytics
Support Service compatibility (to manage VMs by admins)
Recipes management

3. Given that FIWARE Portal includes many things not related to OpenStack 
projects (e.g., data, apps, etc), which parts (if at all) can be actually 
useful for OpenStack community? Or is it useful primarily within FIWARE 
ecosystem?

I?m my opinion this kind of functionalities are oriented to FIWARE but 
perhaps some of them could be reused or rethought to be interesting in 
Openstack Community

I hope this helps
--
Álvaro

El 9 jun 2016, a las 10:41, Alex Glikson <GLIKSON at il.ibm.com> escribió:

I couldn't attend the meeting, so maybe we can make some progress by 
email..

Can someone from UPM (Alvaro?) briefly explain how FIWARE Portal compares 
to OpenStack Horizon? In particular:
1. Underlying technology (I haven't been following the recent developments 
in OpenStack around incorporation of client-side technologies) - how 
(in)compatible the two are?
2. Features
3. Given that FIWARE Portal includes many things not related to OpenStack 
projects (e.g., data, apps, etc), which parts (if at all) can be actually 
useful for OpenStack community? Or is it useful primarily within FIWARE 
ecosystem?

Thanks,
Alex

====================================================================================
Alex Glikson
Senior Researcher, Cloud Solutions for IoT, IBM Research - Haifa; IBM Lead 
for FIWARE
Email: glikson at il.ibm.com | Skype: alex.glikson | Phone: +972-4-8281085 | 
Mobile: +972-54-6466667




From:        Kenneth Nagin/Haifa/IBM at IBMIL
To:        fiware-cloud at lists.fiware.org
Date:        09/06/2016 11:28 AM
Subject:        [Fiware-cloud] contribution of portal features
Sent by:        fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fiware.org



As you know in the last TCS meeting 
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1no_WL0jupE-2MU2w8LWNzoIWQtooqC4Hfp-LhmIhXJ0/edit#heading=h.jtqzq77kj71g

one of the action points relates to the contribution of the portal 
features:  
   "AP on Cloud chapter responsibles (Alex, Kenneth) to come with 
description of plan regarding contribution of portal features.  This AP 
would be for follow-up at FIWARE TSC level"
I think it would be useful for us to begin a thread to discuss the issue 
so that we have a coherent response.

Best Regards,

Kenneth Nagin
Ph: +972-4-8296227
Cell: 054-6976227
Fx: +972-4- 8296114
http://researcher.ibm.com/view.php?person=il-NAGIN


_______________________________________________
Fiware-cloud mailing list
Fiware-cloud at lists.fiware.org
https://lists.fiware.org/listinfo/fiware-cloud


_______________________________________________
Fiware-cloud mailing list
Fiware-cloud at lists.fiware.org
https://lists.fiware.org/listinfo/fiware-cloud




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-cloud/attachments/20160614/b03373a4/attachment.html>