Well, if I was going to live within their walls, I wouldn't be trying to
build this inside of mine.

The whole point of EFS is creating a common, shared distribution
infrastructure, so you don't have to use specific mechanisms for each
product you work with.   So far, it looks to me like ruby is way behind perl
with respect to this sort of scalability, but it's clearly evolving.

My goal is to get this all integrated so that I don't have to install puppet
locally anywhere, and can use it to manage system configuration, and a bare
minimum of software installation.  Even puppet can reap huge benefits from
using EFS as a mean of deploying upgrades to the puppet infrastructure.

Also, another key point of centralized network-based software deployment is
to minimize the amount and complexity of the data you HAVE to manage local
to each node.  Puppet appears to do that very well, but it can NOT solve the
myriad of problems that EFS solves by allowing independent versions to
co-exist.   You are still constrained by rpm/apt-get/pkgadd and their
numerous limitations if you struggle to manage local installations of
software.

On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Steven Jenkins <[email protected]>wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 2:21 PM, Phillip Moore
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I'm about to take on a new role that will involve working with puppet, so
> I
> > thought a good way to get my head around the product would be to
> integrate
> > it with EFS.   Puppet is written in ruby, so naturally, I started with
> ruby.
>
> I use Ruby full-time now, so feel free to ping me..and I did a few
> Puppet commits once upon a time, so I'm familiar w/the product &
> problem space.  I'm not on IM much these days, but I can be if it's
> helpful.
>
> Most Ruby deployments fall into 3 categories:
>
> 1- developers (mostly web developers), who are going to use rvm &
> bundler anyway (which will involve them building their own on top of a
> simple system install): http://rvm.beginrescueend.com/ &
> http://gembundler.com/
> 2- web deployments, where the biggest mindshare is Ruby Enterprise
> Edition and Passenger and doesn't change, is not upgraded much other
> than new gems added.  Most of these systems are scripted builds to the
> degree that it's easier to blow away a system and rebuild with new
> infrastructure rather than try to manage a complex environment
> 3- simple deployments
>
> Ruby and Rails applications have their own version management
> infrastructure (gems, bundler and rvm), so you'll be happiest if you
> live w/in those walls (although I know that Luke, the main architect
> of Puppet, is not happy with Ruby's infrastructure, nor are various
> Distribution people, etc).
>
> Steven
> _______________________________________________
> EFS-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.openefs.org/mailman/listinfo/efs-dev
>
_______________________________________________
EFS-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.openefs.org/mailman/listinfo/efs-dev

Reply via email to