There is a pending pull request that adds the ability for Puppet to load Faces, parser functions, and report processors installed via Rubygems. https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppet/pull/873 This means in addition to extending Puppet via pluginsync you would be able to simply do something like this: gem install puppetlabs-cloud-provisioner That would bring in all the gem dependancies and be ready for use without restarting Puppet. For more examples take a look at this ticket: http://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/7788 I would really love to get some feedback around this, and if you like it, add your vote to the ticket. Thanks. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/dfuw73cfR9AJ. To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Kelsey Hightower <kelsey@puppetlabs.com>wrote:> There is a pending pull request that adds the ability for Puppet to load > Faces, parser functions, and report processors installed via Rubygems. > > https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppet/pull/873 > > This means in addition to extending Puppet via pluginsync you would be > able to simply do something like this: > > gem install puppetlabs-cloud-provisioner > > That would bring in all the gem dependancies and be ready for use without > restarting Puppet. For more examples take a look at this ticket: > http://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/7788 > > I would really love to get some feedback around this, and if you like it, > add your vote to the ticket. >+1, esp as if you use pluginsync on clients and master you end up pulling the same content (even if its only required on the master) to the clients. ohad> > Thanks. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Puppet Users" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/dfuw73cfR9AJ. > To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en. >-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
On Saturday, June 23, 2012 7:38:20 PM UTC-5, Kelsey Hightower wrote:> > There is a pending pull request that adds the ability for Puppet to load > Faces, parser functions, and report processors installed via Rubygems. > > https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppet/pull/873 > > This means in addition to extending Puppet via pluginsync you would be > able to simply do something like this: > > gem install puppetlabs-cloud-provisioner > > That would bring in all the gem dependancies and be ready for use without > restarting Puppet. For more examples take a look at this ticket: > http://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/7788 > > I would really love to get some feedback around this, and if you like it, > add your vote to the ticket. >I will never use it, at least for any system that has a decent native package manager. As I have written before, it is a bad idea to give multiple agents (e.g. gem and yum) overlapping management responsibilities. If it doesn''t interfere with anything else, though, nor take substantial effort to maintain then I won''t vote against it. John -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/7O4phpnzUV0J. To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
On Monday, June 25, 2012 9:19:01 AM UTC-4, jcbollinger wrote:> > > > On Saturday, June 23, 2012 7:38:20 PM UTC-5, Kelsey Hightower wrote: >> >> There is a pending pull request that adds the ability for Puppet to load >> Faces, parser functions, and report processors installed via Rubygems. >> >> https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppet/pull/873 >> >> This means in addition to extending Puppet via pluginsync you would be >> able to simply do something like this: >> >> gem install puppetlabs-cloud-provisioner >> >> That would bring in all the gem dependancies and be ready for use without >> restarting Puppet. For more examples take a look at this ticket: >> http://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/7788 >> >> I would really love to get some feedback around this, and if you like it, >> add your vote to the ticket. >> > > > I will never use it, at least for any system that has a decent native > package manager. As I have written before, it is a bad idea to give > multiple agents (e.g. gem and yum) overlapping management > responsibilities. If it doesn''t interfere with anything else, though, nor > take substantial effort to maintain then I won''t vote against it. > > > John >John you make a really good point. Rubygems support would be totally optional. One of my hopes is that once people are able to use rubygems for things like parser functions and report processors we start seeing more OS packages built from those gems.> >-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/OS_O3XoInLYJ. To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
On 06/25/2012 09:25 AM, Kelsey Hightower wrote:> > John you make a really good point. Rubygems support would be totally > optional. One of my hopes is that once people are able to use rubygems > for things like parser functions and report processors we start seeing > more OS packages built from those gems. > >More useful might be a good and easy way to create OS packages to do plugins like this. That would solve some amount of the chicken and egg problem you see bootstrapping puppet clients that need certain plugins. I suspect this change will allow that since it will suck plugin stuff from a system location, so we don''t have to go trying to create packages to throw stuff in $libdir? Thanks! Jason -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
Jason, Packaging gems as OS packages is pretty easy to do. You can use gem2rpm on RHEL systems or fpm (https://github.com/jordansissel/fpm) in the more general case. -Eric On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 7:41 AM, Jason Slagle <raistlin@tacorp.net> wrote:> > On 06/25/2012 09:25 AM, Kelsey Hightower wrote: > >> >> John you make a really good point. Rubygems support would be totally >> optional. One of my hopes is that once people are able to use rubygems for >> things like parser functions and report processors we start seeing more OS >> packages built from those gems. >> >> >> > More useful might be a good and easy way to create OS packages to do > plugins like this. > > That would solve some amount of the chicken and egg problem you see > bootstrapping puppet clients that need certain plugins. > > I suspect this change will allow that since it will suck plugin stuff from > a system location, so we don''t have to go trying to create packages to > throw stuff in $libdir? > > Thanks! > > Jason > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Puppet Users" group. > To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscribe@** > googlegroups.com <puppet-users%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com>. > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/** > group/puppet-users?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en> > . > >-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
Kelsey Hightower
2012-Jun-26 13:55 UTC
Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Extending Puppet using Rubygems
On Tuesday, June 26, 2012 9:41:00 AM UTC-4, jmslagle wrote:> > > On 06/25/2012 09:25 AM, Kelsey Hightower wrote: > > > > John you make a really good point. Rubygems support would be totally > > optional. One of my hopes is that once people are able to use rubygems > > for things like parser functions and report processors we start seeing > > more OS packages built from those gems. > > > > > > More useful might be a good and easy way to create OS packages to do > plugins like this. > > That would solve some amount of the chicken and egg problem you see > bootstrapping puppet clients that need certain plugins. > > I suspect this change will allow that since it will suck plugin stuff > from a system location, so we don''t have to go trying to create packages > to throw stuff in $libdir? > > Thanks! > > Jason >Yep, also see Eric''s example of using something like gem2rpm to create those OS packages. If you like this idea, please up vote the ticket and add your comments there. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/R3GfTzJw6CgJ. To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
llowder@oreillyauto.com
2012-Jun-26 14:51 UTC
Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Extending Puppet using Rubygems
This sort of support would have saved me about 2-3 days of time here recently. It certainly has my support, and I have upvoted the pull the request. On Tuesday, June 26, 2012 8:55:50 AM UTC-5, Kelsey Hightower wrote:> > On Tuesday, June 26, 2012 9:41:00 AM UTC-4, jmslagle wrote: >> >> >> On 06/25/2012 09:25 AM, Kelsey Hightower wrote: >> > >> > John you make a really good point. Rubygems support would be totally >> > optional. One of my hopes is that once people are able to use rubygems >> > for things like parser functions and report processors we start seeing >> > more OS packages built from those gems. >> > >> > >> >> More useful might be a good and easy way to create OS packages to do >> plugins like this. >> >> That would solve some amount of the chicken and egg problem you see >> bootstrapping puppet clients that need certain plugins. >> >> I suspect this change will allow that since it will suck plugin stuff >> from a system location, so we don''t have to go trying to create packages >> to throw stuff in $libdir? >> >> Thanks! >> >> Jason >> > > Yep, also see Eric''s example of using something like gem2rpm to create > those OS packages. If you like this idea, please up vote the ticket and add > your comments there. >-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/vASRU4XLme4J. To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
Michael Stahnke
2012-Jun-27 22:07 UTC
Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Extending Puppet using Rubygems
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 6:19 AM, jcbollinger <John.Bollinger@stjude.org> wrote:> > > On Saturday, June 23, 2012 7:38:20 PM UTC-5, Kelsey Hightower wrote: >> >> There is a pending pull request that adds the ability for Puppet to load >> Faces, parser functions, and report processors installed via Rubygems. >> >> https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppet/pull/873 >> >> This means in addition to extending Puppet via pluginsync you would be >> able to simply do something like this: >> >> gem install puppetlabs-cloud-provisioner >> >> That would bring in all the gem dependancies and be ready for use without >> restarting Puppet. For more examples take a look at this >> ticket: http://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/7788 >> >> I would really love to get some feedback around this, and if you like it, >> add your vote to the ticket. > > > > I will never use it, at least for any system that has a decent native > package manager. As I have written before, it is a bad idea to give > multiple agents (e.g. gem and yum) overlapping management responsibilities. > If it doesn''t interfere with anything else, though, nor take substantial > effort to maintain then I won''t vote against it.I''m certainly in this camp as well. You can bet that if extensions got popular, we would take some effort to package them (beyond gems) for use within Puppet. It''s pretty simple to migrate from gems to rpm/deb at least.> > > John > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Puppet Users" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/7O4phpnzUV0J. > > To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.