Re: [Puppet Users] Re: "Open Source Team" planning meeting summary

2011-06-01 Thread Peter Meier 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Hi

First, I would like to thank for that open process and the commitment
you are putting into that. And I'm really excited that there is now a
team dedicated to address the things in core puppet. Awesome! Thanks!

However, as this thread seemed to become more and more a "Please, fix
that bug"-list, I would like to tell my story as well:

>> I hope this gets resolved too, but the bug ticket says it was pushed to
>> 2.8.x
> 
> 
> I asked the core developers to spend some time investigating it a while ago
> to see if we could fix it in 2.6.x, but the report was that this would
> require significant enough plumbing changes that it needs to be done for a
> feature release, and we didn't get it into 2.7.x
> 
> If there's an appropriate middle ground we can hit for a solution, I'd love
> to target it earlier if possible.

in the last two days I was bootstrapping a new puppet environment at a
customer's place and I ran into some wtf's of problems I had forgotten
or I haven't encountered so far.

But for nearly every issue I could find a (long) outstanding bug report.
Most of them are about puppet acting in a unexpected way aka ignoring
the principle of last surprise. As usual there are people who started to
depend on that behavior and now we need to make it configurable and the
idea is to wait for a new major release so we can introduce a behavior
change while switching to the more expected way.

None of them seem to be fixed so far for 2.7, so my assumption is that
we have to wait till the next one. :/

Often there are workarounds available or they are not that severe, so
one can live with them. But still: things are broken.

I know we are a bit late to the 2.7 release game, but I still would like
to raise my concerns that to me it sometimes looks like a lot of these
bugs seem to get forgotten more and more and are getting burried within
progress and the available workarounds. But still: things are broken.

I'm going to comment on these bug reports.

One of the major ones I found is that filebucketing is broken (since a
year):

#5362 [1] & #3807 [2] - I really had to do the following to get
filebuckets to the master:

filebucket{main:
  path => false,
  server => puppet,
}
File{ backup => main }

filebucket's got recently some improvements like getting a diff and
displaying the buckets in the dashboard is quite a nice feature. But the
underlying puppet feature is broken for over a year?

Imho this should get the attention it deserves for 2.7.

Actually, I wanted to do here another "rant" about ENC acting weird, but
while doing more research I actually found a couple of other bug reports
all talking about the same and also one where it looks like this is
going to be fixed. But the history of back and forth is quite amazing :/ ...

So I will link all these bug reports together so you can decide which
one is actually still valid.

I hope you understand my point, otherwise please ask!

Thanks!

~pete

[1] http://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/5362
[2] http://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/3807
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk3mi30ACgkQbwltcAfKi3+bRwCfY4qnlHA8AtYCHEjMZKIyW7Y5
CC4AoKp3AU3FTuD3LN4G9pzdUGr23h/c
=Inz9
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: "Open Source Team" planning meeting summary

2011-06-01 Thread Nathan Clemons 
I'd suggest looking into http://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/3238 if you
have a chance. It's been open a long time and is an inconvenience when using
stored configs.

--
Nathan Clemons
http://www.livemocha.com
The worlds largest online language learning community



On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Jacob Helwig  wrote:

> On Thu, 26 May 2011 09:38:28 -0700, Jacob Helwig wrote:
> >
> > As promised yesterday, here are the results of our first planning
> > meeting.
> >
> > Right now, we're loosely following a Scrum style of development. With
> > the current one-week iteration's backlog outlined below.
> >
> >  * #2128 - Allow arbitrary fact as node_name identifier
> >
> >  * #7224 - Bad english: hostname was not match with the server
> >certificate
> >
> >  * #4416 - Resources cannot be used on the run where they are synced
> >
> >  * Package type V2 (apt)
> >
> >  * Package type V2 (dpkg)
> >
> >  * Package type V2 (aptitude)
> >
> > We're trying to work on things that we know have annoyed people using
> > Puppet. We are very open to any suggestions on what to add to the
> > following iterations, so please vote on tickets in Redmine[1], and
> > comment on these updates.
> >
> > The "Package type V2" items don't currently have any tickets in Redmine,
> > but the goal will be to clean up the current package type in the hopes
> > of having a clean, "modern" and well tested type, and set of providers
> > that people can use as a reference when writing their own.  If the
> > experiment in refactoring the package type, and the apt, aptitude, and
> > dpkg providers goes well, we plan on continuing on to the rest of the
> > providers.
> >
> > In addition to the iteration backlog, #7670 and #7681 have become
> > priorities that we will be addressing as soon as we can.
> >
> >  * #7670 - operatingsystem fact incorrect after clear on Ubuntu
> >
> >  * #7681 - Regression, arrays and variables
> >
> > [1] http://projects.puppetlabs.com
> >
>
> Just a quick reminder that we're going to have our planning meeting
> tomorrow.  If you'd like to influence what we end up prioritizing for
> ourselves for the coming week, please speak up.
>
> #7670, and #7681 have both been fixed, and merged into the appropriate
> branches to be released.
>
> I've had one suggestion of working on #650 (Puppet replaces conf
> directories when they are symlinks).
>
> Right now, the back-log looks the same as it did last wednesday due to
> the two "blockers" popping up, and the long holiday weekend here in the
> States.
>
> --
> Jacob Helwig
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iQGcBAEBAgAGBQJN5YLwAAoJEHJabXWGiqEBTBoMAIgU7JXHtexP2CCfphlIdca+
> oqz5WHH9aJd97mCfHvVAsKiTReY98ugtX9b4Z+1SG3Q7wQTkD4m8uw6ZoITQJwRu
> WgyztfxqZlnvdPZne+bE2XLljAMyehZimxn2sd/gbDxbVHlW0CmP4/8Hz831OlZY
> lChS3UX1SEwSDNEbhjdVpMP5Scse+BGTkTcNevWiFknDpNSEpkGEVNY4J6UFYWhT
> n3MdNw5kToB9DTpDGlG6RbKzjTKJB5eOjDjPerdhxNj0HacFI36qzi6DcSeY7CpQ
> /egZLOTps6Q4ftGxM6YKOXdyeqHSQiLGbBaIYhzEy5PqR3s2fe5FN2f9Aqzrn1LU
> +8R8vo56EGole+Ty1QG75yIHcb2f0OF4ekMIMA4EwDGq/vJkYlppGuBp64k9BR/l
> EadeGbvSRxVKjiuyAUgi/78sKzJ5TN9fX1tULnGC2ud3OFK+cc4s/lgSJMMe7bqz
> s+3pEeUmhj0fVGnEFsaGivnn3swcCiPzSfycZwt7KA==
> =0EHz
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: "Open Source Team" planning meeting summary

2011-06-01 Thread Nigel Kersten 
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 1:20 AM, Patrick  wrote:

>
> On May 31, 2011, at 9:01 PM, Alan Sparks wrote:
>
> > On 5/31/2011 9:07 PM, Jacob Helwig wrote:
> >> On Tue, 31 May 2011 20:56:47 -0600, Alan Sparks wrote:
> >>>
>  On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Jacob Helwig   > wrote:
> 
> Just a quick reminder that we're going to have our planning meeting
> tomorrow.  If you'd like to influence what we end up prioritizing
> for
> ourselves for the coming week, please speak up.
> 
> >>>
> >>> Apologize for not having a bug number for this, but I recall that
> >>> web-of-trust (intermediate CAs) did not work with Puppet as is.  If
> >>> that's true, that's a long-standing one I'd like to see fixed...
> >>> -Alan
> >>>
> >>
> >> I think you're talking about #3143.
> >>
> >> http://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/3143
> >>
> >
> > Looks right... we need that where I work, is a killer if that has to
> > wait for a 2.7ish.mumble release...
> > -Alan
>
> I hope this gets resolved too, but the bug ticket says it was pushed to
> 2.8.x


I asked the core developers to spend some time investigating it a while ago
to see if we could fix it in 2.6.x, but the report was that this would
require significant enough plumbing changes that it needs to be done for a
feature release, and we didn't get it into 2.7.x

If there's an appropriate middle ground we can hit for a solution, I'd love
to target it earlier if possible.

-- 
Nigel Kersten
Product, Puppet Labs
@nigelkersten

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: "Open Source Team" planning meeting summary

2011-06-01 Thread Patrick 

On May 31, 2011, at 9:01 PM, Alan Sparks wrote:

> On 5/31/2011 9:07 PM, Jacob Helwig wrote:
>> On Tue, 31 May 2011 20:56:47 -0600, Alan Sparks wrote:
>>> 
 On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Jacob Helwig >>> > wrote:
 
Just a quick reminder that we're going to have our planning meeting
tomorrow.  If you'd like to influence what we end up prioritizing for
ourselves for the coming week, please speak up.
 
>>> 
>>> Apologize for not having a bug number for this, but I recall that
>>> web-of-trust (intermediate CAs) did not work with Puppet as is.  If
>>> that's true, that's a long-standing one I'd like to see fixed...
>>> -Alan
>>> 
>> 
>> I think you're talking about #3143.
>> 
>> http://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/3143
>> 
> 
> Looks right... we need that where I work, is a killer if that has to
> wait for a 2.7ish.mumble release...
> -Alan

I hope this gets resolved too, but the bug ticket says it was pushed to 2.8.x

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: "Open Source Team" planning meeting summary

2011-05-31 Thread Alan Sparks 
On 5/31/2011 9:07 PM, Jacob Helwig wrote:
> On Tue, 31 May 2011 20:56:47 -0600, Alan Sparks wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Jacob Helwig >> > wrote:
>>>
>>> Just a quick reminder that we're going to have our planning meeting
>>> tomorrow.  If you'd like to influence what we end up prioritizing for
>>> ourselves for the coming week, please speak up.
>>>
>>
>> Apologize for not having a bug number for this, but I recall that
>> web-of-trust (intermediate CAs) did not work with Puppet as is.  If
>> that's true, that's a long-standing one I'd like to see fixed...
>> -Alan
>>
> 
> I think you're talking about #3143.
> 
> http://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/3143
> 

Looks right... we need that where I work, is a killer if that has to
wait for a 2.7ish.mumble release...
-Alan


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: "Open Source Team" planning meeting summary

2011-05-31 Thread Jacob Helwig 
On Tue, 31 May 2011 20:56:47 -0600, Alan Sparks wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Jacob Helwig  > > wrote:
> > 
> > Just a quick reminder that we're going to have our planning meeting
> > tomorrow.  If you'd like to influence what we end up prioritizing for
> > ourselves for the coming week, please speak up.
> > 
> 
> Apologize for not having a bug number for this, but I recall that
> web-of-trust (intermediate CAs) did not work with Puppet as is.  If
> that's true, that's a long-standing one I'd like to see fixed...
> -Alan
> 

I think you're talking about #3143.

http://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/3143

-- 
Jacob Helwig


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: "Open Source Team" planning meeting summary

2011-05-31 Thread Alan Sparks 

On 5/31/2011 7:19 PM, Nigel Kersten wrote:
> 
> 
> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Jacob Helwig  > wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 26 May 2011 09:38:28 -0700, Jacob Helwig wrote:
> >
> > As promised yesterday, here are the results of our first planning
> > meeting.
> >
> > Right now, we're loosely following a Scrum style of development. With
> > the current one-week iteration's backlog outlined below.
> >
> >  * #2128 - Allow arbitrary fact as node_name identifier
> >
> >  * #7224 - Bad english: hostname was not match with the server
> >certificate
> >
> >  * #4416 - Resources cannot be used on the run where they are synced
> >
> >  * Package type V2 (apt)
> >
> >  * Package type V2 (dpkg)
> >
> >  * Package type V2 (aptitude)
> >
> > We're trying to work on things that we know have annoyed people using
> > Puppet. We are very open to any suggestions on what to add to the
> > following iterations, so please vote on tickets in Redmine[1], and
> > comment on these updates.
> >
> > The "Package type V2" items don't currently have any tickets in
> Redmine,
> > but the goal will be to clean up the current package type in the hopes
> > of having a clean, "modern" and well tested type, and set of providers
> > that people can use as a reference when writing their own.  If the
> > experiment in refactoring the package type, and the apt, aptitude, and
> > dpkg providers goes well, we plan on continuing on to the rest of the
> > providers.
> >
> > In addition to the iteration backlog, #7670 and #7681 have become
> > priorities that we will be addressing as soon as we can.
> >
> >  * #7670 - operatingsystem fact incorrect after clear on Ubuntu
> >
> >  * #7681 - Regression, arrays and variables
> >
> > [1] http://projects.puppetlabs.com
> >
> 
> Just a quick reminder that we're going to have our planning meeting
> tomorrow.  If you'd like to influence what we end up prioritizing for
> ourselves for the coming week, please speak up.
> 
> 
> I could be wrong, but I imagine people would quite like to see this
> issue fixed:
> 
> http://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/7127
> 
> where the prerun_command exiting non-zero doesn't block the run, and I
> believe the postrun_command doesn't change the report status to failed.
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> #7670, and #7681 have both been fixed, and merged into the appropriate
> branches to be released.
> 
> I've had one suggestion of working on #650 (Puppet replaces conf
> directories when they are symlinks).
> 
> Right now, the back-log looks the same as it did last wednesday due to
> the two "blockers" popping up, and the long holiday weekend here in the
> States.
> 


Apologize for not having a bug number for this, but I recall that
web-of-trust (intermediate CAs) did not work with Puppet as is.  If
that's true, that's a long-standing one I'd like to see fixed...
-Alan

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: "Open Source Team" planning meeting summary

2011-05-31 Thread Nigel Kersten 
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Jacob Helwig  wrote:

> On Thu, 26 May 2011 09:38:28 -0700, Jacob Helwig wrote:
> >
> > As promised yesterday, here are the results of our first planning
> > meeting.
> >
> > Right now, we're loosely following a Scrum style of development. With
> > the current one-week iteration's backlog outlined below.
> >
> >  * #2128 - Allow arbitrary fact as node_name identifier
> >
> >  * #7224 - Bad english: hostname was not match with the server
> >certificate
> >
> >  * #4416 - Resources cannot be used on the run where they are synced
> >
> >  * Package type V2 (apt)
> >
> >  * Package type V2 (dpkg)
> >
> >  * Package type V2 (aptitude)
> >
> > We're trying to work on things that we know have annoyed people using
> > Puppet. We are very open to any suggestions on what to add to the
> > following iterations, so please vote on tickets in Redmine[1], and
> > comment on these updates.
> >
> > The "Package type V2" items don't currently have any tickets in Redmine,
> > but the goal will be to clean up the current package type in the hopes
> > of having a clean, "modern" and well tested type, and set of providers
> > that people can use as a reference when writing their own.  If the
> > experiment in refactoring the package type, and the apt, aptitude, and
> > dpkg providers goes well, we plan on continuing on to the rest of the
> > providers.
> >
> > In addition to the iteration backlog, #7670 and #7681 have become
> > priorities that we will be addressing as soon as we can.
> >
> >  * #7670 - operatingsystem fact incorrect after clear on Ubuntu
> >
> >  * #7681 - Regression, arrays and variables
> >
> > [1] http://projects.puppetlabs.com
> >
>
> Just a quick reminder that we're going to have our planning meeting
> tomorrow.  If you'd like to influence what we end up prioritizing for
> ourselves for the coming week, please speak up.
>

I could be wrong, but I imagine people would quite like to see this issue
fixed:

http://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/7127

where the prerun_command exiting non-zero doesn't block the run, and I
believe the postrun_command doesn't change the report status to failed.





>
> #7670, and #7681 have both been fixed, and merged into the appropriate
> branches to be released.
>
> I've had one suggestion of working on #650 (Puppet replaces conf
> directories when they are symlinks).
>
> Right now, the back-log looks the same as it did last wednesday due to
> the two "blockers" popping up, and the long holiday weekend here in the
> States.
>
> --
> Jacob Helwig
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iQGcBAEBAgAGBQJN5YLwAAoJEHJabXWGiqEBTBoMAIgU7JXHtexP2CCfphlIdca+
> oqz5WHH9aJd97mCfHvVAsKiTReY98ugtX9b4Z+1SG3Q7wQTkD4m8uw6ZoITQJwRu
> WgyztfxqZlnvdPZne+bE2XLljAMyehZimxn2sd/gbDxbVHlW0CmP4/8Hz831OlZY
> lChS3UX1SEwSDNEbhjdVpMP5Scse+BGTkTcNevWiFknDpNSEpkGEVNY4J6UFYWhT
> n3MdNw5kToB9DTpDGlG6RbKzjTKJB5eOjDjPerdhxNj0HacFI36qzi6DcSeY7CpQ
> /egZLOTps6Q4ftGxM6YKOXdyeqHSQiLGbBaIYhzEy5PqR3s2fe5FN2f9Aqzrn1LU
> +8R8vo56EGole+Ty1QG75yIHcb2f0OF4ekMIMA4EwDGq/vJkYlppGuBp64k9BR/l
> EadeGbvSRxVKjiuyAUgi/78sKzJ5TN9fX1tULnGC2ud3OFK+cc4s/lgSJMMe7bqz
> s+3pEeUmhj0fVGnEFsaGivnn3swcCiPzSfycZwt7KA==
> =0EHz
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>
>


-- 
Nigel Kersten
Product, Puppet Labs
@nigelkersten

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.