I have added some more notes and code snippets to the MadHatter github. I
have not had a chance to organize it all though as I am working to get the
rest of the prototype integrated into the Cobbler code base. So far this has
been a breeze. The code is really nice to work with, and integrating the API
is turning out to be a hugh success so far.
I am currently doing some local testing and plan to release an alpha
snapshot in the coming weeks.
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 8:28 PM, Jeroen van Meeuwen <kanarip(a)kanarip.com>wrote:
On 02/08/2010 05:07 PM, Jonathan Sabo wrote:
> I think its a good idea to try and further the configuration
> management capabilities in cobbler. I don't see doing that as
> reinventing the wheel. If you can replace the need to set up a
> separate run time configuration management system, awesome. I would
> prefer to build fully configured systems as part of the provisioning
> process over having to setup another system to do runtime
> configuration management if at all possible. I think a better work
> flow is to update your provisioning system (cobbler) and rebuild and
> reboot into a fully configured system. Do you disagree?
My concern with the original pitch of the idea, which has been addressed
already, was two-fold.
One was the danger of re-inventing the wheel, which is obviously a
choice anyone has to make for themselves. Sometimes in order to be able
to move forward a giant leap, one has to make a step or two backwards.
I'm the first person to understand that I just didn't see the point in
this case -again, based on the original pitch of the idea.
The other concern was the need to manage the configuration of a node
during the runtime stage of a node's life cycle as well, not just during
the provisioning stage or during the bootstrapping. Again from the
original proposal, I didn't feel that was sufficiently addressed. Now
that we all know more about Kelsey's intentions with MadHatter, this is
less of a concern to me.
Whether MadHatter is a poll, pull or push mechanism doesn't truly
concern me, nor does it concern me whether it is platform-independent
(but for that one proprietary software company's operating system
product series).
Again, Kelsey has already addressed both; My concerns were based on the
original proposal, I just so happen to disagree and I feel I've made my
argument to the extent that I can. Maybe that's just because of my
fortunate disposition that I have, finding Puppet extremely easy to work
with.
Luckily, Kelsey has found use in my responses and is going to clarify /
has cleared up what it is exactly he's after on aforementioned Wiki page.
Win/win as far as I'm concerned ;-)
-- Jeroen
_______________________________________________
cobbler mailing list
cobbler(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/cobbler