Hi Matthaus,

The mcollective plugins installed by separate packages but going into
the same path as an "AIO" sounds a bit like reinventing SCLs.

If mcollective was dependent on a ruby run time from an "AIO" puppet
package, and one tried to upgrade puppet with mco, I'd expect there to
be interesting fireworks...

-Josh

--
On 11/19/2014 11:28 AM, Matthaus Owens wrote:
> Josh,
> Facter and mcollective will both be part of the AIO. Rubygems is part
> of the ruby stack that will be included in the AIO, so installing gems
> shouldn't change much, you would just need to ensure that the gems are
> installed using the AIO gem binary. Facter will no longer be
> independently upgradable. (For testing and development, we will be
> including documentation on how to run the various projects alongside
> the AIO from source). Mcollective plugins will still be packaged, and
> will be updated to use the new layout so they will be compatible with
> the AIO package.
>
> The AIO model is the model that our windows packages have been using
> for some time now with great success.
>
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Joshua Hoblitt <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 11/18/2014 06:11 PM, Michael Stahnke wrote:
>>> On EL6.x, why not use a new SCL?  Or even install into the existing
>>> ruby193 SCL?
>>
>> Part of the goal here is to have control of the ruby version. The SCL offers
>> one version of Ruby 1.9.3, Ubuntu offers another in their distribution, as
>> does Mac OS X, and the next OS. Compound that with libssl fun and End of
>> Life constraints on Ruby 1.9.3, and it's just not that fun. (SCLs also have
>> their own lifecycle that is different than RHEL).
>>
>> We'll be picking one Ruby (2.1.z), and using that everywhere for a
>> consistent stack.
>>
>> I'm not unsympathetic to the desire to vendor a version of ruby but that
>> doesn't prevent the creation of a new SCL with all PL vendored (is that a
>> word?) packages in it.  This is a primary use case for SCLs.
>>
>> I'm a bit concerned about gems and other components accumulating in the path
>> tree of an AIO that aren't tracked; I foresee upgrade 'fun'.  I think it
>> would be preferable to be able to package gems, report processing scripts,
>> etc. into RPMs that install into a puppet SCL.
>>
>> Would facter be part of a puppet AIO?  If so, would that mean it's no longer
>> independently upgradable?  How would you orchestrate agents installing gems
>> that are needed by ruby facts?
>>
>> How would a puppet AIO affect mcollective?  Would it be it's own AIO with
>> independently vendored dependencies?  How would mco agents be installed?
>>
>> -Josh
>>
>> --
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Puppet Developers" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to [email protected].
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-dev/546CD8D6.8030903%40cpan.org.
>>
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-dev/546CF97B.1070002%40cpan.org.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to