Kubespray: Need approval to remove EFK

[woopstar]

Neeed approval to remove the EFK stack from Kubespray.

@ant31
@mattymo
@atoms
@chadswen
@rsmitty
@bogdando
@bradbeam
@riverzhang
@holser
@smana
@mirwan

[Atoms]

efk component issues:
https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/kubespray/issues/3332
https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/kubespray/issues/3323
https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/kubespray/issues/3322
https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/kubespray/issues/2842
https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/kubespray/issues/2395

Same as here, proposal to remove this
https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/kubespray/issues/3181

From my side i approve removing efk, and making some note in README that all applications should be installed using helm, kubespray is about cluster itself and crutual parts of it.

[ant31]

I approve ! :)

[ant31]

In short, if it was not that complex I would be ok to leave it as a kubespray addons. Logs manager could be seen as a core components of a cluster.
But the E[LF]K stack is too complex, has too many knobs and we won't be able to provide serious(production-grade) deployment from kubespray.

+1 to remove it.

[woopstar]

Maybe we should provide a list of helm charts / commands in some sort of contrib, to show people how to install EFK with helm instead? So we only maintain a list of helm charts if so ?

[Atoms]

i think documentation about helm charts would be sufficient

[desaintmartin]

A recommendation or a list of recommendations in the doc would be helpful.
Please note that there is no "one-click" way to install and manage an EFK configured for kubernetes from the official helm charts right now. I was suggesting previously to wait for it before removing EFK from kubespray.

[riverzhang]

+1

[chadswen]

Remove it. Thanks!

[mirwan]

+1 for removing efk

[desaintmartin]

Although I actually like the idea of focusing on core and removing all of this, I think it has been done too quickly.

From the outside, it feels like kubespray does not care about its users. I know it is not true, but at least a few lines of documentation stating the breaking changes AND giving some clue about how to install an EFK would be nice. I personally don't care as I know how to do the switch, but I don't think newcomers would think kubespray as being "stable" seeing this.

[woopstar]

Although I actually like the idea of focusing on core and removing all of this, I think it has been done too quickly.

From the outside, it feels like kubespray does not care about its users. I know it is not true, but at least a few lines of documentation stating the breaking changes AND giving some clue about how to install an EFK would be nice. I personally don't care as I know how to do the switch, but I don't think newcomers would think kubespray as being "stable" seeing this.

I could not disagree more. EFK is still available in the latest release. The discussion about removing EFK has been up for very long. Yesterday it was discussed in our Slack channel again.
We also came up with, that we indeed should add some information on how to use HELM. But the basic idea of Kubespray is to provide a production ready cluster, not with addition addons. It is up to the individual user to add the needed addons, while it is also a big hassle for us to maintain all those addons.

So the first step here was/is to remove EFK from upstream. Next step must be to include various docs / contrib for people that like to use EFK etc.

[desaintmartin]

Then we agree in this case. All I'm telling is "tell the users", but if it is a planned next step then I'm happy with it.