Tech talk/demo: Deploying multiple Open edX instances onto a Kubernetes Cluster with Tutor

@braden @lpm0073 @andres @gabor @keithgg @regis @jhony_avella @Felipe To accelerate a bit the process, should we do a synchronous meeting, with the goal of deciding on the definition of a shared project scope for this, that we would all agree to adopt and maintain together?

Here is a poll to find a time to do this – if you would like to participate, please add your availability :slight_smile: Try to select the maximum amount of slots, to help to find a common time:

The results will be there.


hello all, apologies to all for my absence. I’ve been down with COVID for the last couple of weeks, but feeling better now :slight_smile:


@antoviaque great idea! I just added my availability.

1 Like

Thank you for filling the availability poll! :+1:

It looks like we have two slots where everyone who has answered is available – let’s do July 26th at 16:00UTC? That’s right after the contributors meetup.

Zoom URL to join: Launch Meeting - Zoom

See you there! :slight_smile:


To follow-up on the latest meeting, should we plan a new one for 16th of August?
cc: @Felipe @antoviaque @lpm0073

Thanks to those who have attended this meeting. It was really nice to see everyone, and the conversation was fruitful!


@MoisesGonzalezS @Neo @gabor @jhony_avella @Felipe @braden @andres @lpm0073 @keithgg @antoviaque

Action items

Resulting from the discussions:

  • @Felipe will look into Helm charts - shared helm charts to deploy Open edX on Kubernetes looks like a good option to collaborate with. He will post his review of it within the next couple of weeks
  • If this confirms that it would be worth using to try to work together, @Felipe and @braden will work out a concrete proposal document together, for shared helm charts to deploy Open edX on Kubernetes, which will then be reviewed by the group.


Chat log

00:07:40 Felipe Montoya: Miro | Online Whiteboard for Visual Collaboration
00:44:23 jhony: GitHub - eduNEXT/drydock
00:53:12 Gábor Boros: libdjango/templates · main · opencraft / Operations / OpenCraft Helm Charts · GitLab


We should definitely plan for a follow-up meeting – but maybe after we have completed the async steps decided during the meeting, and done at least one async pass of review on the document that will result from it? Synchronous meetings can be useful to resolve discussions that take a lot of back & forth – but for meetings to be useful there should be work & async discussions between them?

@Felipe @braden When do you think you will get a first draft up for review?

The inmediate next step was actually on me. Here is un update:

After our meeting I started my helm investigation enthusiastically and I think I have reached a point where its clear that writing helm charts for the openedx project is something that we at edunext would be very interested in.

Now, I suppose that we can write some plan together @braden. I’d use this place to leave some ideas that I think would be ideal to tackle or general concerns I have.

For the project

  • we need to make it flexible and modular
    • many composable libraries?
    • put everything behind flags?
  • get started with the project already adopting oep-55
  • publish the charts to

The community politics

  • make it in a provider agnostic place? e.g the openedx org
  • use the core contributors program to handle participation
  • would we target this to eventually be a reference installation as per oep-45?

Learning from the configuration project

  • owner file or equivalent. I think this was the largest issue we found, trying to modify a role who’s maintainer or main user was not clear
  • public roadmap from the start
  • we will not be able to merge and maintain every thing that operators might want. The project should make it easy to extend this in other ways
  • sometimes the preprocessing of the values was the key element of a feature, but this was only a secure data thing that was never published. E.g: embargo CIDRs

Best practices

  • everything we have come to expect of an openedx project:
    • conventional commit
    • lots of CI actions to update, test on PRs
    • high test coverage. How is this achieved in helm
  • what are HELM specific best practices that we should adhere to?

I’ll be happy to work sync or async in the next step.


@Felipe That’s great! I’ll ping you early next week and we can start writing up the plan :slight_smile: