> > I'm not really surprised by this, puppet is written in Ruby (an interpreted > language) vs CFengine which is written in C. I've used both, and I'd > gladly trade a little CPU performance for the stability gains offered by > puppet. CFengine is notoriously buggy in implementation, something I can > definitely attest to (like when spaces make a difference in > unions/intersections when the documentation plainly says they should > not...). > > I've used CfEngine 2, and would gladly trade CPU utilisation for the more expressive DSL. Swapping the order of operations round in the actionsequence declaration got boring, too. (not sure about version 3).
J. -- 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.
