Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Otto, the successor to Vagrant

hashicorp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 185 posts

Re: Otto, the successor to Vagrant

#41

Post by drinchev »

> Vagrant is a mature, healthy project that is continuing to grow every day. We are committed to supporting Vagrant for the foreseeable future and will continue to release new versions. Otto is our vision for the next generation and will be developed alongside Vagrant.

Yeah I agree. That's why there will be a time gap between 5 years, until Otto becomes mainstream. The eco-system of vagrant is so good that I even got it supported in my IDE ( WebStorm ). I don't plan to use Otto, before I can enjoy all the benefits of Vagrant that exist today.

Re: Otto, the successor to Vagrant

#42

Post by whalesalad »

skorecky wrote: post #39
alrs wrote: post #27

"Notice that the Appfile makes no mention of OS, memory, disk space, etc. Otto has built-in knowledge of best practices and picks smart defaults for you." Sounds like a big bag of "nope."

Why? This is what I love about Heroku. I get to build the app I want without worrying about all the other aspects of hosting that make me want to never launch an app ever again. I love the idea of focusing on the development part and letting something / someone else worry about hosting.

Have you ever dealt with a large app deployment on Heroku? Unless you're willing to throw money at the problem it sucks.

Re: Otto, the successor to Vagrant

#43

Post by mitchellh »

Hello everyone! I just wanted to note that I'm running around at HashiConf and likely won't be around to answer as many questions or comments as I'd like. But thank you for all the activity around this and we're excited to show this to you today.

I want to just give a few key notes, though many other folks around here are right.

* For Otto 0.1, we focused on developer experience. We don't recommend deploying for anything more than demos. Future versions of Otto _are_ going to make this production-ready though, and we already have plans in place to do so.

* As others have discovered, Otto is built on top of our other tools and executes them under the hood. We didn't reinvent the wheel, and this has huge benefits. We're dedicated to making all our tools better, and as we do, Otto naturally improves as well.

* Otto is a lot of magic, we're not trying to hide that. It is a magical tool. But we also give you access to the details (OS, memory, etc.) using "customizations." We'll improve customizations and increase the number of knobs over time.

* Vagrant development will continue, we have some major Vagrant releases planned. Please see this page for more info: https://ottoproject.io/intro/vagrant-successor.html

* Remember that Otto is 0.1 today and Vagrant is 6 years old. We have a long way to go to reach the maturity and toughness of Vagrant. We're committed to make that happen, but it will take time.

Thanks everyone, sorry for not being able to be more active in here. Have a great day!

Re: Otto, the successor to Vagrant

#44

Post by beberlei »

brudgers wrote: post #17
LukeB_UK wrote: post #9

All Ruby development environments look alike, all PHP development environments look alike, etc. Did they do any user research? Doesn't feel like it based on the above statement.

Mitchell Hashimoto has been supporting Vagrant users for several years now. I wouldn't be surprised if that experience has led him to such a conclusion in regards to the use of Vagrant, e.g. all uses have dependency on a version of Ruby/PHP and some versions of some number of libraries and so on. The same abstractions allow control despite differences at a finer grain.

The number of variations on PHP applications are infinite:

1. Apache or Nginx+PHP-FPM 2. INI Configuration 3. PHP Extensions and their INI configuration 4. Vhost Configuration, especially rewriting rules 5. Docroot in app root, or dedicated directory

This cant possible be defined in a common/generic way and supporting more than 50% of the use-cases.

There is a reason why complex click to configure interfaces exist for PHP and Vagrant with Phansible http://phansible.com/ and PHPuppet.

Re: Otto, the successor to Vagrant

#46

Post by mikehc »

cleverjake wrote: post #15
guelo wrote: post #12

Unfortunate name, there's a popular Java open source library called Otto.

There are a lot of things called otto - https://github.com/search?q=otto&type=Repositories doesn't mean its a bad name

Yeah, but look at the number of stars and forks. Square's Otto is a pretty popular library.

Side note: I don't know why someone is down voting people saying this. I mean yeah they will not change their name I guess but it should be bad for the next big project to choose a name that is not taken by a popular project already.

Re: Otto, the successor to Vagrant

#48

Post by abrahamepton »

alrs wrote: post #27

"Notice that the Appfile makes no mention of OS, memory, disk space, etc. Otto has built-in knowledge of best practices and picks smart defaults for you." Sounds like a big bag of "nope."

I think that's why they're defaults? Not hardcoded unchangeable values?

Re: Otto, the successor to Vagrant

#49

Post by rubiquity »

huslage wrote: post #45

Otto is adding stupid to stupid. Vagrant is a pile of garbage and Otto is adding more junk to that garbage. Who cares.

Do you mind backing up your opinions? Vagrant is a very widely used and beloved tool.

edit: I just noticed your profile indicates that you work at Docker, Inc. I'm trying to figure out whether I feel that plays into your opinion or not but I would expect a bit more professionalism at least.

Re: Otto, the successor to Vagrant

#50

Post by skorecky »

whalesalad wrote: post #42
skorecky wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? This is what I love about Heroku. I get to build the app I want without worrying about all the other aspects of hosting that make me want to never launch an app ever again. I love the idea of focusing on the development part and letting something / someone else worry about hosting.

Have you ever dealt with a large app deployment on Heroku? Unless you're willing to throw money at the problem it sucks.

Yes and if you're a small team with limited resources and you don't have an operations person/team throwing money at the problem works.

There will come a time when you will need to setup a more customized hosting solution but hopefully by then you can hire someone to do operations that knows what they are doing.

I don't think Heroku or Otto are designed for big projects anyways, they're a great way to get up and running and help you grow without having to worry about infrastructure upfront or for a couple years.

Post reply on HN