On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 4:15 PM, Eric Sorenson <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
> On Dec 5, 2016, at 2:11 PM, Trevor Vaughan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Eric,
>
> Unfortunately, you've now built a distribution (a very minor distribution,
> but one nonetheless). As such, I would *highly* recommend following the
> time honored (and massively tedious) method of having something like
> collections for rolling major release updates and snapshots in time as you
> roll forward.
>
> This is how we do it and we modeled it off of the CentOS, Ubuntu, Debian,
> RedHat, Suse, etc... models where a lot of disparate moving parts need to
> have some level of stability over time.
>
>
> But you control which agents are pointed at a given repo, right? That is
> kind of a fundamentally different design constraint: we want nearly
> everyone to start out from the same place and to carry as many people
> forward with new releases without them having to revisit their repository
> setup.
>

Yes, but nowhere that I've been, or worked, would allow an upstream vendor
to dictate the update schedule. Every update had to be mirrored, approved,
tested, and scheduled.


>
> So, what I would find easiest to deal with would be something like keeping
> the PC1, PC2, etc.... nomenclature but taking that whole hog.
>
> So:
>
> PC1 -> Latest everything in the PC1 distribution
> PC1.0.0 -> Package snapshot at PC1.0.0
> PC1.0.1 -> Package snapshot at bugfix release PC1.0.1
> PC2 -> Latest everything in the PC2 distribution
> PC2.0.0 -> Major breaking change from PC1.X
>
>
> Do mean making each one of these things an entire separate repository?
> With its own release package, directory structure, and package contents for
> every operating system supported at that point?
>

Yes, this would mirror most projects that I've used and mirrors the
expectation that was met by the PackageCloud team.

If you're self hosting, it's usually just symlink management.


>
> PCX -> Insane stuff that might break, basically Fedora/Tumbleweed for
> Puppet
>
>
> I kicked around the idea of a smaller version of this for a while, but got
> stuck on the problem of how to get people using the latest-and-greatest
> *off* it if they wanted to stabilize onto a numbered release, and
> conversely what they'd do if a repo they were on was EOL'ed and no longer
> receiving security updates.
>

The same as Fedora/Tumbleweed/etc... Front page announcements and mailing
list posts that you're going to have a bad time if you stay on release X.

A lot of us patch our code from the repos on the fly because we need new
features and/or want to test things. Being able to just point our test
system at a repo and let it fly would be nice.


>
>
> Etc....
>
> I would definitely not recommend making it difficult for users that need
> to mirror repositories for offline networks. In terms of high compliance
> environments, this is pretty much all of them.
>
>
> Is there something in the proposal that makes mirroring harder or easier
> than it is today?
>


Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but what I need is to guarantee that I'm
downloading the 'collection formerly known as PC1.0.0'. Which is difficult
right now so I have a bunch of janky scripts to cobble it together.

If I had snapshot repos, People that were approved to use PC1.0.0 would
have a known, stable, place to start from.

People that could upgrade to PC1.1.0 could point to that repository, etc...

Alternatively, for YUM systems at least, you could put together a groups
file that would coalesce everything in a given version. Makes it more
difficult for non-yum base system sync tools to deal with though.


>
> Eric Sorenson - [email protected]
> director of product, puppet ecosystem
>
> --
> 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/0CB30596-CCDC-44A7-B71A-266F0EDC8178%40puppet.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-dev/0CB30596-CCDC-44A7-B71A-266F0EDC8178%40puppet.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>



-- 
Trevor Vaughan
Vice President, Onyx Point, Inc
(410) 541-6699 x788

-- This account not approved for unencrypted proprietary information --

-- 
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/CANs%2BFoXJ55aKY29VXHAfSoTzgwrcwQcDFCdSb%3D2rXU3kh_Td%2BQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to