On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Paul Nasrat <pnas...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On 9 February 2010 17:53, Michael DeHaan <mich...@reductivelabs.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Paul Nasrat <pnas...@googlemail.com> wrote: >>> On 9 February 2010 17:39, R.I.Pienaar <r...@devco.net> wrote: >>>> hello, >>>> >>>> ----- "Michael DeHaan" <mich...@reductivelabs.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> > I've written an application, which aims to solve all of the missing >>>>> peaces >>>>> > around puppet - http://theforeman.org >>>>> >>>>> Ohad, as you've said "I've written an application, which aims to >>>>> solve all of the missing peaces around puppet". Obviously you've done a >>>>> lot of work here, but I need to communicate something from a >>>>> community perspective -- the proper place to fix missing pieces in Puppet >>>>> is by >>>>> contributing to Puppet -- our vision is to have no such "missing >>>>> pieces". Hence things done outside of core tend to fragment the >>>>> userbase and make things harder to install/use/manage/maintain. The >>>>> future of this workflow tool is going to be Puppet's Dashboard. >>>>> Where there are barriers to doing this, we will remove them. >>>> >>>> As a non affiliated community member who spend a lot of my time on Puppet >>>> I think this is a particularly unfriendly and in fact alarming statement >>>> for someone from RL to make. >>>> >>> >>> I agree, I'm sure Michael didn't mean to be offensive hear, but it >>> comes off as arrogant. The community exists around puppet and there >>> should be room for innovation within it. We want to encourage tool >>> writing systems administration, not a centralized single company based >>> environment. Obviously Reductive needs to make money and keep going >>> but dismissing the work of active and contributing members of the >>> community and stating it's from "a community perspective" feels >>> disingenuous. I personally don't think it's a good statement of the >>> community perspective. >>> >>> Paul >>> >> >> Paul -- I'm as community oriented as you'll get. > > Show don't tell, I'm aware of your work on other projects. But being > part of the community around puppet is earned not transitioned with a > role. Whilst I think you're background and skills make you > >> Moving forward, our efforts should be in contributing around one >> common tool that everyone in our community can contribute to. > > So you don't believe an ecosystem of tools can exist around puppet and > facter? You believe that one solution fits all? > > This really is coming across in a light I don't think you intend.
Sounds like it. So imagine my intent. > >> Unfortunately due to some IP issues we can't do this around Foreman -- >> and /we/ can't contribute to it. > > I'm aware of that. What I'm objecting to is a myopic vision that there > can't be an ecosystem. > > Paul There can and must be an ecosystem. We want to encourage as many integration points and projects as possible. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
