> Though I've since been thinking (and a quick codesearch[*] confirms > it) that we have a bunch of hostname==service/vhost assumptions > baked into our configuration management right now. While I'm not > opposed to the plan in principle, executing it implies a pretty > significant cleanup effort to stop using things like $::fqdn all > over the place. That isn't work that I _personally_ have bandwidth > to tackle right now, and it's a potentially disruptive effort for > each of the services whose modules/classes need this sort of > refactoring. >
At the summit Clark pointed out that many of our vhost templates could be simplified to listen on *. I think this works for http, not sure about https. I agree with the idea of getting a new host naming scheme, but I also agree that there will need to be some minor refactoring done. The problem, as you point out, is that we have $::fqdn sprinkled all over, so it would be a lot of churn to fix things everywhere. I would not support some kind of hack that overwrote fqdn. I also don't think I have the bandwidth to refactor all of puppet right now. -- Spencer Krum [email protected] _______________________________________________ OpenStack-Infra mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
