71–80 of 186 posts
Ansible is best of breed. But didn't Red Hat hear? Immutable infrastructure is the future! http://michaeldehaan.net/post/118717252307/immutable-infrast...
I was using ansible with packer https://www.packer.io/ to build AMIs (Amazon Machine Images). I'm spending a lot more time with docker these days though. I see Ansible as primarily an orchestration tool.
Interesting! Ansible is great technology. Not as mature as Puppet or Chef, but it's getting there. However Red Hat is currently heavily pushing (what I understand to be) their own fork of Puppet inside Satellite 6. So quite a few RHEL customers in the process of rolling out the latest Satellite is probably going to want to hedge their investment in it. Perhaps there is some Red Hatter here who could comment?
Its not a fork of Puppet, Satellite ships with its own copy of Puppet (3.6 iirc) which it integrates to provide the configuration management side of the product but its stock un-modified puppet. In fact the puppet side of Satellite is built around Foreman ( http://theforeman.org/ ) which is an open source project that isn;t Red Hat controlled so even if Red Hat wanted to move 100% to Ansible it would be very hard wor…
Satellite 6 and Puppet Enterprise are direct competitors, and there is not much further upstream development on Puppet 3.6, so I expect Red Hat to have to take on the necessary development work during the life time of the product.
So, in essence almost a fork already, and in the future much more so. You already have to choose, you have to port your old codebase and tooling to one or the other.
I always wonder why cf-engine is so unpopular on HN. It has some nice advantages like no dependency on ssh or a scripting language. It is not as simple to get started, though.
Edit: added link to mhartl's tutorial: http://www.learnenough.com/tutorial-writing
I think the price point here is about a couple of things: - Chef and Puppet are too expensive for most companies to acquire, and have too much operational cost for too little revenue - Ansible got a strong following in the SMB space, Red Hat probably thinks they can move that upmarket some - Ansible's agentless configuration management has potentially strong applicability in a container world (why do I need a chunky…
SMB = small business?
Interesting! Ansible is great technology. Not as mature as Puppet or Chef, but it's getting there. However Red Hat is currently heavily pushing (what I understand to be) their own fork of Puppet inside Satellite 6. So quite a few RHEL customers in the process of rolling out the latest Satellite is probably going to want to hedge their investment in it. Perhaps there is some Red Hatter here who could comment?
I found this sentence funny "Representatives of Red Hat and Ansible did not immediately respond to requests for comment". I take it to mean: "we wanted to run the story as quickly as possible; still it would have been nice to get superquick comments by RH or Ansible; tough luck, though."
To me "did not immediately respond to requests for comment" smacks of neediness and self importance on the reporter's part (answer me now, you fools, don't you know who I am and what power I behold?!) and the people that would respond to such comments being in the middle of dealing with something more important at the time (perhaps answering a queue of queries that came in first, or queries from people who are more i…
My idea was to develop the infrastructure with Ansible, e.g. no ssh to change some httpd settings at all. Everything via Ansible. It worked very well as long as the playbooks and number of servers was very small.
My experience with Ansible has not been so pleasant. Especially performance is a jobstopper. In my environment it takes 20 min for 12 Servers to be setup with some Redis, Elasticsearch stuff. Quite some become_user directives, but 20 min for this kind of stuff is just not acceptable. After all, application settings needs to be tuned and iterated over, too. My idea was to develop the infrastructure with Ansible, e.g.…
That's why it has tags. So you can run just the settings states rather than running the whole 20 minute thing over and over again.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In defense of maven it does provide neither branching nor looping statements so refering to it as a "programming language" is hard to justify.
Neither does HTML and the L stands for language.