Supporting Ansible as another tool for ovirt infra mgmt

[Marc Dequènes (Duck)]

Quack,

On 04/11/2016 05:38 PM, Barak Korren wrote:

> Well, what kind of hand is needed?

Help about the VM, you replied to this part (which unfortunately began
off-list, my bad), thanks.

The other part is tracking the features you need, to see if upgrading
Foreman and using the work Misc pointed at could be a working solution.
Because if an important feature is missing, then this path will not
happen now.

And then if it is a possible path, are you all willing to work on this
migration?

> I remain unconvinced about the benefits of using Ansible here as
> oppsed to the downsides of maintaining two CM systems in parallel.

I only viewed Mailman as a proof of concept. I agree maintaining both
systems sux. So that's why I'm talking about a possible migration. I
guess if it fails then we'll be back to reintegrating MailMan in the
current system and this is not that horrible. If it works we can work on
converting the rest with the knowledge we gained.

I'd be happy to help but clearly I would need some time and energy from
people in the project. Other OSAS members could also give a hand.

> Yeah I'm the current owner of the ticket to upgrade it and migrate it
> to PHX, I will get to it eventually...

I've no idea about your workload, nor about the urgency of migrating
Mailman. I think this is important to check our availability and will to
invest on this.

> I think doing this kind of work will benefit us as well as others, it
> should not be too much trouble imo.
> Consider sending a rough patch to Gerrit, we can help and lead you from there.

Probably. Nevertheless it seems most projects OSAS are in touch with are
getting out of Puppet and I myself in other projects decided not to go
into this solution after some comparison and XP collection. So you may
understand I'd like to invest my time in something not totally
ephemeral. But if this migration is rejected or postponed, I will.

> Eyal suggested using Ansible right now in a one-off fashion to get the
> Mailman server up. I don't particularity like that idea beucase it
> seems to me it would make us incur some technical debt we will not pay
> quickly. I'd rather pay it upfront. But I can understand if we want to
> take such short cuts it the interest of getting Mailman out of some
> bad state it is currently it. I'm not sure what is the situation with
> it right now.

I'm new here :-), neither do I.

Regards.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.ovirt.org/pipermail/infra/attachments/20160411/89224368/attachment.sig>