Jesus M. Rodriguez wrote:
Michael DeHaan wrote:
Jesus M. Rodriguez wrote:
Michael DeHaan wrote:
Michael DeHaan wrote:
So, continuing from FudCON's hackfest ideas, I think these are the
biggies in terms of "func core" kind of stuff to get done.
Thoughts? I've added the missing ones to the ideas page. There
are a lot of other expansion/module ideas, but this is probably
the (larger) stuff that is perhaps missing. However some of it
is pretty much optional too.
* minion-to-minion + ACLs (and of course docs on how to do this)
.... a really neat feature
* multiple-overlords/cert-sharing ... seemed to be requested a lot
at talk
* overlord-delegation (for network reasons, but also maybe
efficiency.... there's a government app that basically did a tree
like fan-out for this).
* figuring out how to loosen up the permissions of caller (making
sure things are accessible by TurboGears if it opens up a Client()
object). Currently it just needs the /etc/pki/func and
/var/lib/func stuff. This is probably not too much of a problem
but worth talking about.
I do not think we should do it TWICE one for webui and one for client.
It should be done in a way that the ui and client can easily make use
of it.
* Groups? We had talked about doing this in the WebUI and CLI
seperately but we could perhaps actually make it part of the Func
client API seperately and save a local DB so that could be
shared? Thoughts?
By DB, I mean of course something like bsddb or even a config file,
not an actual DB :)
Hrm. Is the config enough? How small are these groups? If we go with
a DB, anything that SQLAlchemy can use would be fine with me. That way
when func gets big and needs a REAL DB it would be easier to switch
and not have to gut a lot of code.
* .... whatever else I'm forgetting
Ideas page being kept updated here:
https://fedorahosted.org/func/wiki/IdeasForFunc .. I've removed
some of the things we've gotten done, if you finish something up,
feel free to remove it.
Wrt to "more support for buildbot / mock / make Func a killer build
tool"
Um seriously? Don't we already have enough build tools :)
Yes, very seriously.
Func is very nice for intramachine communication and if you are
building an internal build system, that's nice to have to signal
things when they are done and need to do other things.
Fedora Infra is actually quite interested in Func for this purpose.
It's a secure intra-machine conduit, with some nice multi-machine
capabilities... so for build comm it's a fairly easy thing to do and
lots of people have to build their own build infrastructure -- would
be nice to help those out.
It's not what I'll be concentrating on, but for those that want to do
build systems, it's a good fit.
Ah, I see. Didn't think of it that way. Would it be a buildsystem
that *uses* func or would the buildsystem be built into func.
Seems to me I would see func as more a "core" of these bigger
systems. Either way, sounds reasonable.
Just buildrpc replacing SSH scripting, basically.
I am not sure if a module to make mock usage and other things makes
sense or not, if so, there could be also some modules for that.
(Seperate from the above).
---Michael
_______________________________________________
Func-list mailing list
Func-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/func-list
