Talk:OpenShift

This article was nominated for deletion on 18 February 2016. The result of the discussion was keep.

OpenShift is not exclusively on-premises[edit]

The OpenShift Container Platform is suitable for self managed deployments on-premises, but is also available for a few public clouds in both self-managed and cloud-managed flavors. I think the first paragraph needs editing to reflect this fact. Reference: https://www.openshift.com/products 136.56.142.115 (talk) 18:57, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OpenShift conflation (openshift.org vs openshift.com)[edit]

The infobox conflates OpenShift the service with OpenShift Origin the project. Rfontana (talk) 17:28, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, it still does. I think a good next step would be for someone to clarify the summary and add an OpenShift Origin section that references openshift.org rather than openshift.com. It would be nice to have "OpenShift" defined objectively. -- RobLa (talk) 20:10, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why is there a redirection of Istio to openshift#isto to the openshift article without there even being a paragraph about istio in the article?[edit]

Ah-ha! Just bit me today. I agree - this needs to be removed. The relationship is tangential, and Istio deserves its own page. --A really paranoid android (talk) 12:19, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Eureka! This explains the redirect. From the history of this page, it looks like a portion of the OpenShift page had stuff about Istio, which got moved to its own page, and then got nuked for insufficient content and converted to a redirect. --A really paranoid android (talk) 01:32, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

History and chronology of the product would be welcome (08/2019)[edit]

“on-premises” and “platform as a service” should be mutually exclusive[edit]

The first paragraph of the article calls OpenShift “an on-premises platform as a service”. But AFAIU “on-premises” roughly means “you run it yourself” and “platform as a service“ roughly means “someone else runs it for you”, so I would think these two are mutually exclusive designations. I guess it would make sense to say that OpenShift can be used both on-premises or provided as a platform as a service, but as it is currently is written, I find it very hard to actually understand what this is supposed to say. 2003:5B:203B:100:6E0B:84FF:FEB4:9EAF (talk) 13:31, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

PaaS does mean what you say, but "on-premises" means something slightly different from what you say. The important thing about "on-premises" is not who runs the stuff on-premise, but that it is on-premise - i.e not in the public cloud or a third party data center (which is how SaaS is done). Thus, you have quite a few service folks running OpenShift infrastructure for customers in their on-premise deployments. -- A really paranoid android (talk) 22:50, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Docker vs. CRI-O/Podman/Buildah[edit]

History section says claims that OpenShift has moved from Docker to CRI-O/Podman/Buildah, but latter sections all talk only about Docker. So, which it is? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.191.220.73 (talk) 12:33, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Language and Repository[edit]

Language: In 2016 the infobox "Language" field was changed from "Go and Ruby" to "Go and Angular.js", but I don't see why Angular.js is listed. Anyone know where specifically Angular.js is used?
Repository: The link for the repository is the OKD repository. Is there a reason to use that specific repository rather than pointing to https://github.com/openshift/ or one of the other repos in that org?

-- General Wesc (talk) 21:26, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Different Environments?[edit]

The opening paragraph has an ungrammatical and ambiguous sentence "The family's other products provide this platform through different environments: OKD serves as the community-driven upstream (akin to the way that Fedora is upstream of Red Hat Enterprise Linux), Several deployment methods are available including self managed, cloud native under ROSA, ARO and RHOIC on AWS, Azure, and IBM Cloud respectively, OpenShift Online as software as a service, and OpenShift Dedicated as a managed service." This appears to be an incomplete sentence terminated with a comma, 1. "The family's other products provide this platform through different environments: OKD serves as the community-driven upstream (akin to the way that Fedora is upstream of Red Hat Enterprise Linux)," followed by a second, complete, sentence, 2. "Several deployment methods are available including self managed, cloud native under ROSA, ARO and RHOIC on AWS, Azure, and IBM Cloud respectively, OpenShift Online as software as a service, and OpenShift Dedicated as a managed service."

I suspect the first sentence is orphaned, abandoned mid-sentence by the person who wrote it as an oversight.

 1. It uses the word "upstream" as a noun, which is odd
 2. The colon in this sentence would typically be used to start a list, but in this case there is only one item on the list.
 3. It ends with a comma.

When conjoined with the second sentence, it leads to even greater confusion. Ajrmmm (talk) 00:29, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

differences when OpenShift is compared to Kubernetes[edit]

This is listed as a difference: " The v4 product line uses the CRI-O runtime - which means that docker daemons are not present on the master or worker nodes. This improves the security posture of the cluster."

But even Kubrnetes itself now does not use docker dameon and its also can use CRI-O runtime. — Preceding unsigned comment added by XP 2600 (talk • contribs) 11:02, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation?[edit]

The architecture section is nearly the same as the text on https://medium.com/geekculture/openshift-saas-software-as-a-service-d1bd30be051e 109.130.201.86 (talk) 08:33, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]