On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 2:21 PM, Haïkel <hguemar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
2015-06-04 20:21 GMT+02:00 John Florian <john.florian@xxxxxxxx>:
> I’ve been curious how Fedora plans to tackle inclusion of Puppet 4, but
> haven’t heard even a peep on the subject. As described[1], they’ve moved to
> an all-in-one packaging process that “includes Puppet 4, both Facter 2.4 and
> CFacter 0.4, the latest Hiera and Mcollective, as well Ruby 2.1.5, OpenSSL
> 1.0.0r, and our gem dependencies.” Furthermore, “the package installs into
> its own area in /opt/puppetlabs”. Thus upstream is both bundling and using
> very Fedora-unfriendly file locations. L
>
The source itself really hasn't changed a ton. There might some pathing of /opt/puppetlabs in there, but the source of Puppet is nearly the same. (And if that's a big problem, we'd certainly look at patches on it).
The packaging is quite different from us (Puppet Labs) certainly. However, every linux distro didn't use our packages and repackaged our source themselves anyway, so that shouldn't have changed much from a distro packager/consumer perspective. We've reduced our test matrix by a hundreds (maybe thousands) of cells by supporting fewer rubies and including the bits we need rather than test all variables across 70+ targets that we support.
I love Fedora and always want Puppet to be a part of it. If something's really broken, please let me know.
I know we're behind on F21 and 22. Sadly, the time allotted means we stagger when certain releases come out. Fedora is in the mix to be done soon (how soon is difficult to say.)
>
Hi,
F22 provides Ruby 2.2 and upstream has stated they will only support it starting
Puppet 4.x.
I've been working with puppeteers to port Puppet 4.x on F22, and it has been for
a long time in testing but Puppet 4.1 is being currently pushed to stable.
I'm not backporting it to older Fedora, as Puppet 3.x is still
supported on these
platforms.
As Orion and I were the ones doing Puppet updates recently, I found a new
maintainer for Puppet who will be able to keep it in a sane state.
>
> I’ve long awaited having PuppetDB provided within Fedora[2] and from what I
> understand the bundling has hindered that effort substantially. Are we
> going to lose Puppet in Fedora, or be stuck with an ever aging old release?
> At home, I did the most undesirable thing and enabled the PuppetLabs
> repositories and love the newer products. Meanwhile I still am waiting for
> PL to support Fedora 21 -- and F22 is already out! At work I’m hesitant
> with either route (native Fedora packages vs. PL’s repos) for fear of being
> stuck in an unsupported situation. (Yes, we probably should be on a EL-ish
> distro if it’s critical, but we use Fedora almost exclusively.)
>
>
PuppetDB is a mess, it requires a lot of unbundling work and it's in java.
We're considering packaging it for OpenStack but outside Fedora as it will
be too much effort for us.
It's actually Clojure, not java. One could argue that the way distros want to package java-ecosystem tools is actually what's messy (hence people loving containers, fpm and other tools as well). Having to unbundle items that are tested together and allow a third party to move one of the libraries that the upstream isn't testing with doesn't seem all that sane either. I certainly see both sides of the argument here. I was a long time in the unbundle camp, but after working somewhere trying to appease packaging/distro guidelines on dozens of platforms, it's just impossible. We'd need an engineering team 3x the size it is just to do the testing, and nobody would get any new features. Even RH doesn't package all the jboss stuff in Fedora for the same reasons, and most Linux distribution are very short on packaging for applications and tools built on JVM vs what's really out there.
I'm not sure how we/I can help here, but again, discussion welcome.
If you're willing to contribute packaging it, then I could help you in
this task.
Regards,
H.
> --
>
> [1] https://docs.puppetlabs.com/puppet/4.0/reference/release_notes.html
>
> [2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1068867
>
>
>
> --
>
> John Florian
>
>
>
>
> devel mailing list
> devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
