I''ve been pondering how to handle our file distribution issues - we''re starting to roll puppet out, and I''d like to get it somewhat right from the start. I''ve been watching the list for a while, and observed ''complaints'' about the speed of the fileserver method when dealing with recursive directories. If I can avoid this, I''d like to :) We already use Subversion for our development process, and it''s a product I''m fairly familiar with, so I''ve been pondering if it would be possible to replace the fileserver/puppet:// method with a subversion server and svn:// respectively. The biggest downside that I can see, as I type this, is that puppet:// uses checksums to know when things change - svn:// would require an svn up to be executed each time puppetd ran (for every resource where svn:// was used). I think. Am I a loon for even wanting to use subversion in this manner, or is it actually a feasible concept?
may be use svn+ssl is better :) On 1/23/08, Duncan Hill <duncan.hill@first-utility.com> wrote:> I''ve been pondering how to handle our file distribution issues - we''re > starting to roll puppet out, and I''d like to get it somewhat right from the > start. I''ve been watching the list for a while, and observed ''complaints'' > about the speed of the fileserver method when dealing with recursive > directories. If I can avoid this, I''d like to :) > > We already use Subversion for our development process, and it''s a product I''m > fairly familiar with, so I''ve been pondering if it would be possible to > replace the fileserver/puppet:// method with a subversion server and svn:// > respectively. The biggest downside that I can see, as I type this, is that > puppet:// uses checksums to know when things change - svn:// would require an > svn up to be executed each time puppetd ran (for every resource where svn:// > was used). I think. > > Am I a loon for even wanting to use subversion in this manner, or is it > actually a feasible concept? > > _______________________________________________ > Puppet-users mailing list > Puppet-users@madstop.com > https://mail.madstop.com/mailman/listinfo/puppet-users >-- Huang Mingyou
On Thursday 24 January 2008 08:31:16 Gary Law wrote:> On 23/01/2008, Duncan Hill <duncan.hill@first-utility.com> wrote: > > Am I a loon for even wanting to use subversion in this manner, or is it > > actually a feasible concept? > > You are not a loon. Many people work around this requirement with > server-side svn checkouts and puppet or nfs shares. Native support > would be good, and within that support for tags would be fantasticly > helpful IMHO. > > Good luck with your coding ;)Eep, another language to learn. Well, I keep meaning to pick up some Ruby, even if it''s just to understand it better when having to dig through source code. For those who thought I meant ripping puppet:// out, I actually meant ''offer puppet://, svn://, http://, ftp://, nfs:// etc'' :)
I''d be more inclined to ask for a git:// implementation. Arjuna Christensen | Systems Engineer Maximum Internet Ltd 7a Parkhead Pl, Albany, North Shore, 0632 | PO Box 8006, Auckland, 1150, NZ DDI: + 64 9 913 9683 | Ph: +64 9 915 1825 | Fax:: +64 9 300 7227 arjuna.christensen@maxnet.co.nz| www.maxnet.co.nz ________________________________ Maxnet | mission critical internet ________________________________ This email (including any attachments) is confidential and intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and erase all copies of this message and attachments. The views expressed in this email do not necessarily reflect those held by Maxnet. -----Original Message----- From: puppet-users-bounces@madstop.com [mailto:puppet-users-bounces@madstop.com] On Behalf Of huang mingyou Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2008 1:22 a.m. To: Puppet User Discussion Subject: Re: [Puppet-users] Replacing puppet:// with svn:// ? may be use svn+ssl is better :) On 1/23/08, Duncan Hill <duncan.hill@first-utility.com> wrote:> I''ve been pondering how to handle our file distribution issues - we''re > starting to roll puppet out, and I''d like to get it somewhat right from the > start. I''ve been watching the list for a while, and observed ''complaints'' > about the speed of the fileserver method when dealing with recursive > directories. If I can avoid this, I''d like to :) > > We already use Subversion for our development process, and it''s a product I''m > fairly familiar with, so I''ve been pondering if it would be possible to > replace the fileserver/puppet:// method with a subversion server and svn:// > respectively. The biggest downside that I can see, as I type this, is that > puppet:// uses checksums to know when things change - svn:// would require an > svn up to be executed each time puppetd ran (for every resource where svn:// > was used). I think. > > Am I a loon for even wanting to use subversion in this manner, or is it > actually a feasible concept? > > _______________________________________________ > Puppet-users mailing list > Puppet-users@madstop.com > https://mail.madstop.com/mailman/listinfo/puppet-users >-- Huang Mingyou _______________________________________________ Puppet-users mailing list Puppet-users@madstop.com https://mail.madstop.com/mailman/listinfo/puppet-users
On Jan 23, 2008 4:23 AM, Duncan Hill <duncan.hill@first-utility.com> wrote:> Am I a loon for even wanting to use subversion in this manner, or is it > actually a feasible concept?I think it is more feasible to request svn/svn+ssh as an additional file source type, rather than outright replacing the puppet source type. We''re perfectly happy with puppet:// in our configuration, and I would really resent a change to svn (or git, or anything else) without the option to keep our configuration as is.
Would you resent a transparent change (make puppet:// == git://)? Obvious benefits to using SCM for distributing files: 1) Rollbacks 2) Rollbacks 3) Rollbacks Arjuna Christensen | Systems Engineer Maximum Internet Ltd 7a Parkhead Pl, Albany, North Shore, 0632 | PO Box 8006, Auckland, 1150, NZ DDI: + 64 9 913 9683 | Ph: +64 9 915 1825 | Fax:: +64 9 300 7227 arjuna.christensen@maxnet.co.nz| www.maxnet.co.nz ________________________________ Maxnet | mission critical internet ________________________________ This email (including any attachments) is confidential and intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and erase all copies of this message and attachments. The views expressed in this email do not necessarily reflect those held by Maxnet. -----Original Message----- From: puppet-users-bounces@madstop.com [mailto:puppet-users-bounces@madstop.com] On Behalf Of Joshua Timberman Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2008 4:07 p.m. To: Puppet User Discussion Subject: Re: [Puppet-users] Replacing puppet:// with svn:// ? On Jan 23, 2008 4:23 AM, Duncan Hill <duncan.hill@first-utility.com> wrote:> Am I a loon for even wanting to use subversion in this manner, or is it > actually a feasible concept?I think it is more feasible to request svn/svn+ssh as an additional file source type, rather than outright replacing the puppet source type. We''re perfectly happy with puppet:// in our configuration, and I would really resent a change to svn (or git, or anything else) without the option to keep our configuration as is. _______________________________________________ Puppet-users mailing list Puppet-users@madstop.com https://mail.madstop.com/mailman/listinfo/puppet-users
On Jan 23, 2008, at 10:23 PM, Duncan Hill wrote:> I''ve been pondering how to handle our file distribution issues - we''re > starting to roll puppet out, and I''d like to get it somewhat right > from the > start. I''ve been watching the list for a while, and observed > ''complaints'' > about the speed of the fileserver method when dealing with recursive > directories. If I can avoid this, I''d like to :) > > We already use Subversion for our development process, and it''s a > product I''m > fairly familiar with, so I''ve been pondering if it would be possible > to > replace the fileserver/puppet:// method with a subversion server and > svn:// > respectively. The biggest downside that I can see, as I type this, > is that > puppet:// uses checksums to know when things change - svn:// would > require an > svn up to be executed each time puppetd ran (for every resource > where svn:// > was used). I think. > > Am I a loon for even wanting to use subversion in this manner, or is > it > actually a feasible concept?There''s nothing technically stopping this from happening, and once I get 0.25.0 out it''ll be much easier, but it would require a good bit of development. If someone is seriously interested in doing this development, then contact me and I can work with him/her to understand how it can be done. I''m not planning on attacking this any time soon, though. -- What''s the good of having mastery over cosmic balance and knowing the secrets of fate if you can''t blow something up? -- Terry Pratchett, "Reaper Man" --------------------------------------------------------------------- Luke Kanies | http://reductivelabs.com | http://madstop.com
On 23/01/2008, Duncan Hill <duncan.hill@first-utility.com> wrote:> Am I a loon for even wanting to use subversion in this manner, or is itactually a feasible concept? You are not a loon. Many people work around this requirement with server-side svn checkouts and puppet or nfs shares. Native support would be good, and within that support for tags would be fantasticly helpful IMHO. Good luck with your coding ;) Gary -- Gary Law Email: gary.law@gmail.com Chat googletalk/messenger: gary.law@gmail.com iChat/jabber/AIM: gary.law@mac.com
On Jan 23, 2008 10:54 AM, Duncan Hill <duncan.hill@first-utility.com> wrote:> For those who thought I meant ripping puppet:// out, I actually meant ''offer > puppet://, svn://, http://, ftp://, nfs:// etc'' :)On Jan 23, 2008 8:26 PM, Arjuna Christensen <arjuna.christensen@maxnet.co.nz> wrote:> Would you resent a transparent change (make puppet:// == git://)?As long as it is a change that Duncan clarified above, I don''t have issue. I don''t want to have to rewrite our 200+ file definitions and test them with a new method.
>For those who thought I meant ripping puppet:// out, Iactually meant ''offer>puppet://, svn://, http://, ftp://, nfs:// etc'' :)...and don''t forget good ole'' CVS :-) Call me old-fashioned, but I prefer CVS (over ssh of course) to Subversion any day!