Re: MadHatter: Using Cobbler for advanced configuration management
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 4:33 AM, Jeroen van Meeuwen <kanarip(a)kanarip.com> wrote:
On 02/03/2010 05:43 PM, Kelsey Hightower wrote:
> Thanks for the feedback, it seems as though I need to add a lot of
> clarity to the wiki. The goal would remain a runtime tool. Configuration
> would happen in the same way that Puppet does today.
>
> The goal is to replace puppet using the cobbler framework. I have a
> prototype that works as you describe. The order of events does not change.
>
OK, well, at least this makes it a little more clear ;-) I don't see
why, though, so maybe that's worth another set of paragraphs as well.
Currently, as it stands, I just have to strongly disagree with your
vision of "replacing Puppet using the Cobbler framework", but that's not
actually worth anything without some sort of motivation;
In order for Cobbler or Koan to have the same or similar functionality
currently implemented through Puppet, along with it's abstraction level,
multi-platform capabilities not to even mention the workforce and cloud
behind it, is to re-invent the wheel; not a very unhealthy thing to do
in certain situations, but very quickly very much pointless if you're
not seeking functionality beyond what Puppet will or would do.
It might be way more beneficial to work on better integration, and/or to
make Puppet meet your expectations.
Kind regards,
-- Jeroen
_______________________________________________
cobbler mailing list
cobbler(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/cobbler
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? I see a lot
of benefits from doing it that way. Wouldn't it be a good idea to try
and improve making that happen by modelling the rest of the objects
(resources, management classes, whatever it should be) inside of
cobbler? I guess you can just say no it's not I'm going to just use
some runtime config management system but I think you could achieve
the same result by just using cobbler and perhaps making that easier
or cooler by hooking up cobbler in some way.
Thanks,
Jonathan