On 6 July 2010 21:21, James Turnbull wrote:
> Just so people know this is fixed in 2.6 and when we're finished
> hammering the alpha into a beta - we'd love you guys to test this.
>
Sure, I'll try and put some time aside for testing.
It sounds like 2.6 should resolve a few of the bugbears I've
Dan Carley wrote:
>
> - In addition to custom types, providers and facts, flapping back and
> forth between environments. It's also not possible to have separate
> fileservers for additional paths between environments. But it's probably
> not something that will affect you at this stage.
>
Dan
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 9:56 PM, christopher floess wrote:
>
> We work on this by keeping the puppet configuration in Subversion. We
>> then
>> have a Makefile at the top level which runs a puppet syntax check on any
>> modified file before a commit.
>>
>>
> Uh, would you mind divulging to someon
christopher floess writes:
>> We work on this by keeping the puppet configuration in Subversion. We then
>> have a Makefile at the top level which runs a puppet syntax check on any
>> modified file before a commit.
>
> Uh, would you mind divulging to someone with a little less experience, how
>
We work on this by keeping the puppet configuration in Subversion. We then
have a Makefile at the top level which runs a puppet syntax check on any
modified file before a commit.
Uh, would you mind divulging to someone with a little less experience,
how this syntax check works? I can read
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 3:01 AM, Jean-Baptiste Barth
wrote:
> Hi there,
> Is there a canonical way to manage my recipes' release process ? I mean test
> it before they're pushed in production.
I recommend adding a "tests" directory in your modules which include
the classes in the manifests directo
First of all, if your sysadmins aren't advocates of version control (even
more so than your developers), fire them now, Now, NOW. Or at least hire a
competent senior sysadmin to train them properly.
Back to the topic at hand. We have only two environment (production and
development). Since the
On 5 July 2010 11:01, Jean-Baptiste Barth wrote:
> For the moment we only have 1 puppetmaster here. I noticed that if I have a
> syntax error in one of my included .pp, then puppet runs fail on all nodes
> (even if they do not use this recipe), which is not acceptable. More
> generally, working di
Jean-Baptiste Barth writes:
> Is there a canonical way to manage my recipes' release process? I mean test
> it before they're pushed in production.
Not "canonical", as far as I know.
> For the moment we only have 1 puppetmaster here. I noticed that if I have a
> syntax error in one of my includ
Hi there,
Is there a canonical way to manage my recipes' release process ? I mean test
it before they're pushed in production.
For the moment we only have 1 puppetmaster here. I noticed that if I have a
syntax error in one of my included .pp, then puppet runs fail on all nodes
(even if they do no
10 matches
Mail list logo