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

141–150 of 185 posts

Re: Otto, the successor to Vagrant

#141

Post by mikegirouard »

kvz wrote: post #112
Cacti wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does Otto do that Vagrant doesn't? I mean, Vagrant is pretty good! What do I need Otto for that I can't do with Vagrant and a few scripts (that I'm likely to have to write anyway)?

Otto lets you create infra and deploy to it. So it covers production, not just development. On top of that it offers default stacks for PHP/Ruby/etc that will be maintained by the community. From what I understand, if you're demands aren't too specific, you'll profit from infra/os/apps all set up as a foundation for you app. It detects what app you have and hence you can even have an empty Appfile (similar to Vagrant…

True, but to be clear, Vagrant can also cover production.

https://docs.vagrantup.com/v2/push

Re: Otto, the successor to Vagrant

#142

Post by brown9-2 »

Cacti wrote: post #108
mitchellh wrote: post #43

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 anyt…

What does Otto do that Vagrant doesn't? I mean, Vagrant is pretty good! What do I need Otto for that I can't do with Vagrant and a few scripts (that I'm likely to have to write anyway)?

The project's Getting Started guide does a really good job at answering that question: https://ottoproject.io/intro/getting-started/install.html

Re: Otto, the successor to Vagrant

#143

Post by kyllo »

andybak wrote: post #134
akurtzhs wrote: post #82

So the supported environments are available at https://www.ottoproject.io/docs/apps/index.html , and they're Go, PHP, Node.JS, Ruby, and Docker. I hope Python gets added to that list as a first class environment in the future.

I thought the omission of Python to be... strange.

Probably punted because they couldn't decide between 2 or 3.

Re: Otto, the successor to Vagrant

#144

Post by sbarre »

andybak wrote: post #137
krick wrote: post #84

I'm not sure if I find it astonishing or expected that somebody finds all that magic good enough to both build that tool and to be thrilled about somebody did. I, for one, find it absolutely unacceptable. The whole point of virtual containers is to have development environment closely resembling production one (not entirely possible, but better than nothing). Your promise that your tool gives me "best possible enviro…

Yes - one size doesn't fit all. Yes - sometimes you need something very specific. But, please - it sounds like you've just damned us to repeat the same low-level tasks again and again. 80% of websites ARE the same. If you're in the 20% (or 10% or 1%) then good luck to you. But for those of us deploying another typical webapp - I'd really like to draw on community knowledge. I never wanted to learn devops same way as…

Amen to that. We copy/paste the same Vagrantfile from project to project, making minor adjustments and improvements (typically after some part of the previous file failed on us in a strange way and we dug around for a fix).

The odd time we have some special requirement (a work queue perhaps?), but most of the time it's language + store + web server and we're off.

Re: Otto, the successor to Vagrant

#145

Post by vidarh »

brudgers wrote: post #34
vidarh wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ruby: MRI vs. REE vs jRuby vs Rubinius, for starters. And this choice is solved through a variety of mechanisms that people rely on for other parts of their infrastructure, and feel strongly about. For my part, this is also a solution that is way too late: We have Docker/Rocket and a range of similar tools. Why do it yet another way, when if you instead build a Docker image, you can take that Docker image and deploy…

Docker is a wrapper around Linux. Vagrant is a wrapper around the entire VM [e.g. Virtual Box or VMware]. Thus Vagrant can be used to manage Windows environments. See the list of Vagrant boxes here: http://www.vagrantbox.es/

Docker can wrap KVM/Qemu, so you can in fact use Docker as a wrapper around the entire VM...

But I take the point - the idea that anyone deploys stuff to Windows is just so foreign to me that it didn't even occur to me.

Re: Otto, the successor to Vagrant

#146

Post by jacques_chester »

sanderjd wrote: post #79
skorecky wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 runn…

> I don't think Heroku or Otto are designed for big projects anyways. If you're right about that in Otto's case, that's a bummer. It's frustrating that there is this seemingly intractable divide between things that are great to start with for a new project (Heroku, etc.) and things that scale well as a project grows huge (Kubernetes, etc.). Every time a devops tool comes out, I read about it in hopes that it has both…

What works for me is

    cf scale my-app-name 4
Or 10, or 100, or however many copies I need.

Re: Otto, the successor to Vagrant

#147

Post by huslage »

rubiquity wrote: post #49
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.

No this isn't Docker speaking. This is me.

I've always felt that Vagrant was a solution in search of a problem and no being at Docker hasn't changed that either way. I have colleagues that love Vagrant and they are certainly entitled to that opinion, as much as I'm entitled to think that it's horrible.

I honestly haven't seen any value brought from Vagrant or its ilk to anyone. There is temporary relief from some very real problems of transmitting development environments around the place. But the tool ends up creating pets that you have to care for over long periods of time. You have to deal with entire operating systems when you really want to abstract away the OS in favor of getting some real work done.

Configuration files as infrastructure aren't particularly interesting to me. I don't see how building annoying bits of configuration will fix anything in the long run.

Also note that while I think the HashiCorp infrastructure-as-code attempts are quite lacking, their Consul and Vault tools are really nice. :)

Re: Otto, the successor to Vagrant

#148

Post by jacques_chester »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #8

Does this use Heroku buildpacks or do they reinvent the wheel? Edit: Otto appears to do a lot of things. But the part that everybody's complaining about is the "magic" part, the part that sets up a system automatically based on the language of the app. Heroku buildpacks also perform this magic, and have been open sourced and have a large community that helps maintain them. They're useful outside of Heroku -- for inst…

I've worked on Cloud Foundry buildpacks team. Several of Cloud Foundry's default are downstream from Heroku (Ruby, Python, NodeJS) and several aren't (Java, Go, PHP).

Heroku's buildpacks are open, but they build them for their own purposes. In particular a large part of my work involved recreating behaviours added to support this or that Heroku change (particularly STACK, god what a mess that was), dealing with binaries being silently substituted, the messy statefulness of their staging architecture.

Oh, and most importantly, we made it all work in a disconnected environment. Which Heroku never intended.

Speaking individually, not as a Pivot, if you didn't have to, I wouldn't recommend starting with Heroku's buildpacks. They solve a lot of problems, but no small part is solving Heroku's problems.

Re: Otto, the successor to Vagrant

#149

Post by jacques_chester »

skorecky wrote: post #78
endriju wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you try http://www.openshift.org ? The self-hosted version is basically what you described, at least for the JVM languages.

I have tried it, but just don't hold up as well as Heroku. I still use and love Heroku, but would be nice to have a similar option I could host anywhere on my terms.

Cloud Foundry. It runs on AWS, vSphere and OpenStack. Apache 2 license, IP belongs to an independent foundation, not a single vendor.

Re: Otto, the successor to Vagrant

#150

Post by stephenr »

bgentry wrote: post #140

Otto looks great, and is probably a substantial improvement over Vagrant. My biggest concern is that it still relies on VirtualBox for local dev. VirtualBox is unreliable and slow, especially its file mounting driver. I'd love to see this evolve to use a different virtualization solution, maybe something based on the OS X Hypervisor Framework (ala https://github.com/mist64/xhyve )

Vagrant works with parallels desktop (free plugin, requires parallels pro in v11+) and VMware fusion (with a paid plugin)
Post reply on HN