On 07/05/2013 02:46 PM, David Schmitt wrote:

One of the big arguments for puppet is the unifying aspect of devs and
ops to use the same tool/language/process, which improves cooperation,
agility and quality of the work. This indicates that your application
deployment should be integrated into your puppet manifests and those
manifests should be integrated into the application development/release
But how are they integrated in your environment? What would you do in my

Another big point in puppet's favor is that it doesn't want to be the
be-all-end-all. If there's a tool that is better suited to a task (the
prime example being package managers) then *please* use that. This
indicates that if capistrano is a good match for your organization's
application deployment (especially in the area of orchestration across
nodes and rollback it leaves puppet in the dust), then you should
leverage those capabilities.
And that's exactly why are we using another tool for the job.

You write "this poses a problem for me, because I'm used to manage
configuration files via puppet." While that may just be lost in
translation, it does sound like your problem is of a much more personal
and a less technical level.
In that case you really need to get rid of
the us-against-them attitude and find solutions that enable the
organization as a whole to repeatably deliver more value faster while
reducing the associated risks.
'you need to find solutions' is a thing I already now. If I didn't know
that, I wouldn't have asked the question in the first place. On the
other hand, one thing I didn't ask about was online psychotherapy...

Did I offend you some how with my OP? If I did, I'm really sorry, that
was not my intention.

This is a non-issue as the deployment process will always be able to
push the changes it needs into the system. So a subversion (no pun
intended) of the deployment process will always be a death knell,
independent of the used tool. So either the devs have the need and right
to modify those configuration files, or they don't. If they have the
need and right, then they also share the responsibility for the system.
Yeah, but things have to stay pretty tight. For example: if you enable
some user account to push files into dot-d directory, not-if-but-when
that account gets broken into, you have a possibility of privilege

So, allowing the write privilege for that directory obviously is not a
good choice.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts


Follow ups

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
posts ‹ prev | 3 of 7 | next ›
Discussion Overview
grouppuppet-users @
postedJul 5, '13 at 11:37a
activeJul 5, '13 at 6:57p



site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase