Hi Ryan, 
Sorry you're having trouble porting it over. Let us know if you have specific questions that we may be able to help with.

In the mean time, here are some of the benefits of CloudMan: technically, CloudMan provides a management interface tailored for Galaxy so you can control the Galaxy process (and the dependent processes such as the database, ftp server and the Reports app) from within it. It comes with a graphical web interface, which exposes many features in one place and allows multiple people to access it without sharing cloud access creds. Functionally, CloudMan allows instances to be cloned and shared with other users so that each instance includes complete configuration and data yet each child instance is independent of the parent. Once the components are prebuilt, other users don't need to install anything locally and can instead use their web browser to create an arbitrary number of instances that each come preconfigured with Galaxy (i.e., Galaxy, toolset, indices) that is ready for use. Exposed via the Cloud Launch app, it allows creation of multiple flavors that can correspond to different toolsets or software versions. 

Hope this helps and let us know if you have more questions.

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Ryan G <ngsbioinformatics@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all - Our organization requires us to use a specific AMI (with a specific flavor of linux) that isn't supported by Cloudman.  Its taking us a bit of time to get this combination working. 

Its taken more than 3 weeks and we still don't have Galaxy /  Cloudman running.  I could probably do the same thing with StarCluster and be up and running within a day. 

I'm very comfortable with using StarCluster and am wondering if there is any benefit to using Cloudman over StarCluster for node management with Galaxy.


Please keep all replies on the list by using "reply all"
in your mail client.  To manage your subscriptions to this
and other Galaxy lists, please use the interface at:

To search Galaxy mailing lists use the unified search at: