Hi there, do you know someone of the community who investigated kubeapps https:// kubeapps .com which relies on Helm charts (so also on kubernetes) to provide apps easily?
PS: I let you rebuild the link, I don’t have enough reputation on the forum.
Ok, I guess it’s not the case.
The discussion has started here: https:// forum .chatons .org/t/kubeapps-pour-installer-et-servir-des-applis-facilement/1041/
Hi,
I did not check Kubeapps, but in fact there is a lot of “easy and fast” app deployement, like lxc (you could publish a container and share it), juju charms (automatic install scripts), etc. even docker could be somewhat consider as an easy to deploy, like tunrkey, and many others.
I think Yunohost is more based on the standard multi-webapp based on a nginx server, but with a automatic system, with some standard and secure “host” configuration that is not part of these others scripted deployment.
I think it could be more easy and easier to maintain apps, but it means a big change in yunohost ecosystem. Maybe some kind of parallel systems? 
Don’t forget that yunohost allow no-techie users to deploy server quickly and easily.
In fact yuno-devs maybe could answer more pecisely
Hi there,
The question is whether you want and need a full blown Kubernetes cluster (providing HA, rolling updates, hardware failover, etc) for just a few applications. Kubernetes is really meant to run on a cluster so unless you are deploying YHN on such a setup (I don’t know if that is even supported), Kubernetes will likely add a lot of complexity for little gain…
As @Mellerin has said, I’d rather go towards something based on LXC to ease app packaging than Kubernetes.
My 2 cents,
1 Like
To give my 2 cents:
-
everything about docker / kubernetes stuff really is a different paradigm than what is done in YunoHost. For many reasons, mainly historical and “people in the team aren’t so familiar with it” we kind of did not follow the whole containerization hype … As everything, there are pro and cons … Clearly there’s a gain in terms of dependency management, but there’s a cost in terms of increased overhead and technical complexity - whereas YunoHost sort of has this goal of remaining kind-of “low-tech” if possible … ;
-
of course you can make several things coexist and in fact some yunohost apps are using docker container and they kinda work. On the other hands it’s good though if we try to stick to the same paradigm for all apps … And for example we’ve seen issues with the docker-ce debian package blowing up some instances
; -
more as a really personal note, and here that’s probably me being embittered, but it’s common to see people coming up with stuff like Docker (but that’s far from being the only example) being a silver bullet that’s going to magically solve problems … and they do solve part of the problems but they have their own issues as well. For example, people think the main issue is installing apps, but imho it’s not. The main issues are : how do you manage upgrades (both in technical terms and in terms of who’s gonna maintain the scripts in the long term) ? how do you integrate the app with the rest of the yunohost ecosystem (asking questions to the admin, nginx configuration, ldap/sso, fail2ban, backup/restore…) ? So in the end of the day, even if upstream devs provide ‘Docker images’ or whatever and it may solve dependency management, they don’t include all the elements to integrate it with a “high-level” system like yunohost and you still have half the work to do …
5 Likes
@Vinz You’re absolutely right and I don’t put kubernetes as a requirement. As a feature it can be useful though. Kubeapps was the app I was investigating and it has it as a dependency.
It seems that portainer.io may provide the capability of UI management of apps.
I’ll keep your feedback on the subject in mind, and try to stay as close as possible from your experience of apps management.
Portainer now provides a UI to manage both docker containers and helm charts (kubernetes), making it my favourite. Looking forward to trying portainer further.
1 Like