On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 8:13 PM, Nigel Kersten <nig...@google.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Nigel Kersten <nig...@google.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 6:11 PM, Jason Rojas >> <ja...@nothingbeatsaduck.com> wrote: >>> >>> With the use of the >>> [production] >>> and >>> [development] sections of the puppetmaster config, you can specify a >>> plugin path, you can have it either be shared, or the same directory just >>> checked out from the development branch in subversion, in my case it is: >>> >>> [production] >>> pluginpath=/opt/puppet/production/plugins >>> [development] >>> pluginpath=/opt/puppet/development/plugins >>> >>> both the directories production and development are different branches in >>> my svn repo. >> >> Have you tested this Jason? This certainly never used to work... >> You'd always get the plugins from the default environment no matter >> what pluginpath specified.... >> >> /me runs off to test again. > > And it is definitely working now... although plugins in modules in > environments are still non functional. > > Awesome, that answers this question... :) >
Actually, I just rediscovered the problem, and I'm curious how you're dealing with this Jason. This works for providing a source for the clients to synchronize their plugins from, but you're still left with the problem of ensuring the plugins are in the *server* Ruby loadpath in order for it to parse the manifests that include your custom plugins. >From memory, others solve this in a similar way to the way we do, with a symlink in /var/lib/puppet/lib to one of the plugins sources, or alternatively they run puppet on the server to populate the plugins so they are in the server load path. This still means you only have one plugin source as far as the server is concerned, but you are in fact distributing different pluginpaths for different environments. I can imagine all sorts of incompatibilities if you're using environments as a release process and have a custom type 'foo' that has quite different attributes in the different pluginpaths. Did that make sense? I haven't quite had enough coffee yet.... -- Nigel Kersten nig...@google.com System Administrator Google, Inc. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
