Hi Stephen,

Don’t worry, the discussion is still very active.  But yes, we still are planning to incorporate ironic using metal kubed.  A driver for that to reduce the amount of custom code that Airship needs to drive provisioning – in the target state, the plan is metal kubed + cluster API will care for,

• Ironic-based machine provisioning
• Kubeadm-based cluster management
• Declarative interfaces for the above

Like you said, this does present a chicken and egg problem around using a k8s cluster to provision a k8s cluster.  We’re designing for that now – in some use cases an ephemeral cluster can be spun up, and in some there would be a centralized management cluster (we call this “cloud harbor”) already.  We have notes, draft design docs, and design meeting recordings if you’re interested,  https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/Airship_OpenDesignDiscussions

and you’re most welcome to join the design discussion as well (times listed on our wiki https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Airship)

Thanks,

Matt

From: Stephen Nemeth <kbaegis@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 5:17 AM
To: airship-discuss@lists.airshipit.org
Subject: [Airship-discuss] Divestiture

Hi there everyone,

Is airship still interested in incorporating openstack ironic for deployments? While metal kubed and cluster-api are cool, this simply increases the dependencies to run airship to begin with doesn’t it? It functionally assumes that you already have kubernetes available just to deploy a new kubernetes environment. Am I missing something critical here? 

Sorry in advance for being late to the discussion. 

Thanks,

Stephen