proposal: stop using servergroups in puppet

[seth vidal]

On Thu, 2011-06-09 at 11:59 -0400, Adam M. Dutko wrote:
> >  1. the distinction between servergroups and services is..... blurry.
> 
> So if we wanted to spin up several load balancers we'd have first
> create a node definition for each balancer then add the proper
> services to the node definitions. This seems to be the reverse of what
> is done now with the host being assigned a servergroup which has
> services defined for what the "group" does. Am I incorrect in my
> understanding? If not, then there will probably be slightly more work
> involved to setup multiple hosts doing the "same" thing, no?


My issue is - explain to me the difference between that and a service?

Really, anything that's NOT node-specific configuration is just an
attribute that the node can include - or an attribute of an attribute or
a collection of attributes.


in pseudo-code:
 server = Node(Seth.fedoraproject.org)
 server.httpd = True
 server.createrepo = True
 server.mock = True
 server.tcp_allows = [22, 80, 443]



Now the httpd attribute may be comprised of a bunch of other
commands/attributes/declarations - but still - just an attribute.

I'm not trying to take away ANY of our configurations we have AT  ALL
right now. I'm trying to just move it so there isn't the hesitation when
trying to figure out where to put things.



> 
> > alternative proposal:
> 
> It does help make things clearer and much more "granular" but let's
> say one host has a minor difference in how the service is configured,
> we would have to accomodate the tweak somehow either by cloning a
> service definition and making the new definition specific to the host
> or by adding in extra modifications using another specification file.

okay? and? We do that now, don't we? How is this different?


really, all I'm suggesting here is moving files around.


-sv