On 17 Jan 2012, at 14:18, Stephen Burke wrote:
> Testbed Support for GridPP member institutes [mailto:TB-
>> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ian Collier said:
>> My view at this point is that better packaging, documentation and
>> simplified configuration and a yaim-like tool - along with effort to
>> support the driving of said yaim-like tool from other config management
>> systems is probably the best bet.
> I think one general question of philosophy is whether you want the configuration for different services to be unified. At the moment yaim has a lot of variables in a generic style, and it then writes them into service-specific config files and scripts which vary quite widely in format. If you start de-yaimifying things you could go in two possible directions - either accept that all services are different and configure each one in its own way, or have some global config file replicating (some of) the information currently in yaim variables and get each service to use it. Which of those would be preferred?
Well, here is your chance to express a view which I'll do my best to represent :)
I think the other question will be who does the work?
But a clear statement that, for example,
'We want something along the lines of yaim, but better and cleaner and are prepared to help' might be a positive way of influencing things.
(In case it is unclear my view is firmly that the supported method should not be puppet, quattor whatever, rather something simpler that can be driven by whatever more sophisticated tools sites choose. I'd also say that the experience of the Quattor Working Group sharing the work of producing configuration templates - they are not just 'produced by GRIF' - even if not perfect, provides a good model.)