Would the group consider creating a Katello Appliance?

[Michael Burbury]

Dear Group,

Would there be any consideration of creating a Katello Virtual Appliance?

Probably based on Fedora with a minimal setup packaged and available for download for
deployment in a Redhat VM or possibly VMware VM?

Thank you for your consideration.


Best Regards,

Michael Burbury

PS> You may have faster uptake and more controlled testing if this was available as a
pre-built, pre-defined virtual machine.
May also reduce the number of requests and issues. Just my 2 cents :)


#####################################################################################
Confidentiality and Privilege Notice 
This document is intended solely for the named addressee.  The information contained in
the pages is confidential and contains legally privileged information. If you are not the
addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to such
person), you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone, and you should destroy this
message and kindly notify the sender by reply email. Confidentiality and legal privilege
are not waived or lost by reason of mistaken delivery to you.
#####################################################################################

[Ivan Necas]

On 10/23/2012 06:27 AM, Michael Burbury wrote:
>  Dear Group,
>  
Hi Michael,

Thanks for suggestion. We were (and still are) thinking about that. On 
the other hand there are some downsides:

1. need for rebuilding every night, if we consider using nightly builds, 
possible but maybe one of the reasons why don't we have this yet.
2. even if that's painful when katello-configure crashes, when reported, 
the installation gets better thanks to that.
3. katello-configure needs to be run anyway, to set up things like certs 
(that are dependent on fqdn etc)

In fact, most of devs use libvirt and some scripting 
(https://github.com/Katello/snap-guest) to get VM quickly. Do you think 
this approach would help? Let's say we created an image for every 
comunity release? Katello-configure would still need to be run, but all 
the packages would be pre-installed. It would probably made the process 
a bit faster but it would be tied only on one platform. For vmware, 
vargrat box would be the answer.

-- Ivan

>  Would there be any consideration of creating a Katello Virtual
> Appliance?
>
>  Probably based on Fedora with a minimal setup packaged and available 
>  for download for deployment in a Redhat VM or possibly VMware VM?
>
>  Thank you for your consideration.
>
>  Best Regards,
>
>  Michael Burbury
>
>  PS> You may have faster uptake and more controlled testing if this was 
>  available as a pre-built, pre-defined virtual machine.
>
>  May also reduce the number of requests and issues. Just my 2 cents J
>
>  ##################################################################################### 
>  Confidentiality and Privilege Notice This document is intended solely 
>  for the named addressee. The information contained in the pages is 
>  confidential and contains legally privileged information. If you are 
>  not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for 
>  delivery of the message to such person), you may not copy or deliver 
>  this message to anyone, and you should destroy this message and kindly 
>  notify the sender by reply email. Confidentiality and legal privilege 
>  are not waived or lost by reason of mistaken delivery to you. 
>  #####################################################################################
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  katello mailing list
>  katello(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
>  https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/katello 

-- 
Ivan

[Lukas Zapletal]

On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 08:34:57AM +0200, Ivan Necas wrote:
>  1. need for rebuilding every night, if we consider using nightly
>  builds, possible but maybe one of the reasons why don't we have this
>  yet.
>  
I don't think we need to rebuild every night, Michael meant Katello
releases I guess.

I think there could be a good was of:

- getting Katello configure working with pure puppt
- getting Katello 1.1 installation in our Foreman/RHEV instance in TLV
- creating an instance and uploading the image somewhere

With this approach, it could be easy to reconfigure this for future
releases.

Another approach could be leverage image factory for this.

LZ

-- 
Later,

 Lukas "lzap" Zapletal
 #katello #systemengine

[Bryan Kearney]

On 10/23/2012 07:17 AM, Lukas Zapletal wrote:
>  On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 08:34:57AM +0200, Ivan Necas wrote:
> > 1. need for rebuilding every night, if we consider using nightly
> > builds, possible but maybe one of the reasons why don't we have this
> > yet.
> >
>
>  I don't think we need to rebuild every night, Michael meant Katello
>  releases I guess.
>
>  I think there could be a good was of:
>
>  - getting Katello configure working with pure puppt
>  - getting Katello 1.1 installation in our Foreman/RHEV instance in TLV
>  - creating an instance and uploading the image somewhere
>
>  With this approach, it could be easy to reconfigure this for future
>  releases.
>
>  Another approach could be leverage image factory for this.
>
>  LZ
>  
Is the goal an applieance, an AMI, or some other delivery format?

-- bk