Re: [Pulp-dev] status of the ansible postgres role
I'm also in favor of doing option 1 until option 2 is possible. I had an existing email thread with the upstream maintainer going. To work towards option (2) I've bumped that thread with him just now, identifying the PRs below and asking him to review+feedback or review+merge. https://github.com/geerlingguy/ansible-role-postgresql/pull/86 https://github.com/geerlingguy/ansible-role-postgresql/pull/92 https://github.com/geerlingguy/ansible-role-postgresql/pull/91 https://github.com/geerlingguy/ansible-role-postgresql/pull/69 If there are additional things besides these PRs please identify them also. On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 10:47 AM Dennis Kliban wrote: > Combination of 1 and 2: we need to find a way to collaborate with the > author more closely to get outstanding PRs merged. > > On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 8:28 AM Matthias Dellweg wrote: > >> Hi all, >> in the ansible-pulp role (that is meant to install pulp) we use a role >> to install the postgresql db-server from galaxy named >> ansible-role-postgres. >> Sadly the upstream version of this role is missing fedora30 support, >> and the PR for this has not been merged for a long time. >> This leads to ansible-pulp using a clone of this role, which is >> hosted on github in a personal namespace and is missing debian10 support >> respectively. >> This sounds to me like a kind of short term workaround, but it is in >> place for almost half a year now. >> >> I see several ways to move this forward: >> >> 1)Leave it as is, wait for upstream. >> pros: nothing to do (now) >> cons: no good debian support >> 2)Use upstream role and add fedora30 config like debian10 config [0] >> pros: no need to maintain a clone of the role >> cons: ugly workaround >> 3)Use upstream, and drop fedora30 support for now >> pros: no need to maintain a clone of the role >> cons: seems quite obvious? >> 4)Maintain a clone of the role in the pulp namespace with a team of >> committers >> pros: most flexibility, fedora30 & debian10 support >> cons: extra maintainance work >> >> (The order is random, and the numbers are only for future references. I >> do not want to express a personal preference this way.) >> >> Matthias >> >> [0] https://github.com/pulp/pulplift/pull/45 >> ___ >> Pulp-dev mailing list >> Pulp-dev@redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >> > ___ > Pulp-dev mailing list > Pulp-dev@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev > ___ Pulp-dev mailing list Pulp-dev@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
Re: [Pulp-dev] status of the ansible postgres role
Combination of 1 and 2: we need to find a way to collaborate with the author more closely to get outstanding PRs merged. On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 8:28 AM Matthias Dellweg wrote: > Hi all, > in the ansible-pulp role (that is meant to install pulp) we use a role > to install the postgresql db-server from galaxy named > ansible-role-postgres. > Sadly the upstream version of this role is missing fedora30 support, > and the PR for this has not been merged for a long time. > This leads to ansible-pulp using a clone of this role, which is > hosted on github in a personal namespace and is missing debian10 support > respectively. > This sounds to me like a kind of short term workaround, but it is in > place for almost half a year now. > > I see several ways to move this forward: > > 1)Leave it as is, wait for upstream. > pros: nothing to do (now) > cons: no good debian support > 2)Use upstream role and add fedora30 config like debian10 config [0] > pros: no need to maintain a clone of the role > cons: ugly workaround > 3)Use upstream, and drop fedora30 support for now > pros: no need to maintain a clone of the role > cons: seems quite obvious? > 4)Maintain a clone of the role in the pulp namespace with a team of > committers > pros: most flexibility, fedora30 & debian10 support > cons: extra maintainance work > > (The order is random, and the numbers are only for future references. I > do not want to express a personal preference this way.) > > Matthias > > [0] https://github.com/pulp/pulplift/pull/45 > ___ > Pulp-dev mailing list > Pulp-dev@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev > ___ Pulp-dev mailing list Pulp-dev@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
[Pulp-dev] status of the ansible postgres role
Hi all, in the ansible-pulp role (that is meant to install pulp) we use a role to install the postgresql db-server from galaxy named ansible-role-postgres. Sadly the upstream version of this role is missing fedora30 support, and the PR for this has not been merged for a long time. This leads to ansible-pulp using a clone of this role, which is hosted on github in a personal namespace and is missing debian10 support respectively. This sounds to me like a kind of short term workaround, but it is in place for almost half a year now. I see several ways to move this forward: 1)Leave it as is, wait for upstream. pros: nothing to do (now) cons: no good debian support 2)Use upstream role and add fedora30 config like debian10 config [0] pros: no need to maintain a clone of the role cons: ugly workaround 3)Use upstream, and drop fedora30 support for now pros: no need to maintain a clone of the role cons: seems quite obvious? 4)Maintain a clone of the role in the pulp namespace with a team of committers pros: most flexibility, fedora30 & debian10 support cons: extra maintainance work (The order is random, and the numbers are only for future references. I do not want to express a personal preference this way.) Matthias [0] https://github.com/pulp/pulplift/pull/45 pgphXMIUNCunm.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Pulp-dev mailing list Pulp-dev@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
