----- Original Message ----- > From: "Deepak Giridharagopal" <dee...@puppetlabs.com> > To: "puppet-dev" <puppet-dev@googlegroups.com> > Sent: Friday, 1 April, 2016 20:42:30 > Subject: Re: [Puppet-dev] Re: Puppet RFC 23 - XPP Files
>> > But please do forget that the extensibility of a tool is one of the key >> features of any OpenSource software. Ops people didn't choose good old >> Nagios because of it's "beautiful" frontend and it's "well-designed" >> plugin API. They are using it because everyone from students to 60 years >> old UNIX veterans are able to write something they use to call a >> "plugin". Mostly awful snippets of Bash or Perl, not worth to be called >> software. But doing customized crazy shit running on millions of >> systems, available since nearly 20 years without breaking compatibility. >> Of course there is Icinga right now ;) New Core, C++, shiny new web... >> but still running those ugly old plugins. They are awful, they are >> terrible, we all hat them. But lots of people invested a lot of time in >> them, so breaking them is a no-go. >> > > Agreed...there's no way we can break compatibility with most existing > puppet modules. That would be some serious, doomsday-level awfulness. > Whatever we come up with in this area has to work with the code that's out > there, and that's definitely the plan. > > The vibe I'm getting from this line of feedback is that we should perhaps > better articulate the longer-term plan around the native compiler in > general, instead of focusing on increments (like .xpp) that, absent the > larger context, may seem unhelpful in their own right? yes please, it will make putting this stuff in context much easier. > This is also good feedback, and something that's worth its own thread > around the usability/manageability/scalability problems you see. I'd love > to have more of a conversation about how to improve things in those areas! > > I do think it's worth keeping in mind that there are more puppet users now > than ever; it's a very big tent. In my humble opinion, generalizations > about what "most average admins" can do are increasingly fraught with peril > the bigger and more diverse our user base has gotten. Indeed and if you recall there was a similar outcry when passenger became the de facto way. The java stack as delivered by PL in PuppetDB and Server is a LOT more manageable than the passenger stack. One just have to take the time to learn it - just like they did the passenger stack. Unlike the passenger stack you'll then discover the thing can actually be monitored in depth and have very mature admin tools. -- 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 puppet-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-dev/1825795904.426062.1459537153704.JavaMail.zimbra%40devco.net. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
