proposal: stop using servergroups in puppet

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 16:56, seth vidal <skvidal at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-06-09 at 12:05 -0400, seth vidal wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> >
>> > > 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.
>>
>>
>
> okay - I've merged/mv'd the files in puppet master from servergroups to
> services and I've modified site.pp to reflect that.
>
> this is ONLY in master/production and it is DONE.
>
>
>
> I was starting to do it in staging and I thought "hmm, is now a good
> time to go ahead and move staging away from a branch and into
> main-line?"
>
>
> the plan here would be to take all the staging bits and move them into
> either separate class definitions and/or subdirs (for the config files)
> so that we don't ever have merge/cherrypick issues between the two
> branches.

something like?

development/
staging/
production/


>
> thoughts?
> -sv
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> infrastructure mailing list
> infrastructure at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
>



-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
"The core skill of innovators is error recovery, not failure avoidance."
Randy Nelson, President of Pixar University.
"Let us be kind, one to another, for most of us are fighting a hard
battle." -- Ian MacLaren