1 |
On Thu, 2005-08-04 at 09:04 -0400, Eric Brown wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> Interesting thread. I have used Gentoo in enterprise situations very |
4 |
> successfully, and I think the whole QA/live-tree argument is moot. In |
5 |
> an enterprise environment, you might have a backup/testing machine to |
6 |
> run your updates on first before they went live. You also wouldn't run |
7 |
> new packages unless they passed your own QA tests first. |
8 |
> |
9 |
> Given the incredible flexibility of portage to support local mirrors, |
10 |
> binary package preparation, and localized versions of packages |
11 |
> (portdir_overlay), I would say that Gentoo is quite a contender in the |
12 |
> enterprise environment. |
13 |
> |
14 |
> Perhaps we need some enterprise documentation to help people realize the |
15 |
> full potential of portage? |
16 |
|
17 |
I think you've missed some of the idea of "enterprise" support. See, |
18 |
for starters, every person shouldn't have to create their own |
19 |
implementation of everything. Perhaps a better solution would be a |
20 |
package that when installed, builds up a local mirror, a binary package |
21 |
repository (with revision control), an automated update system, a system |
22 |
for updating rolled out machines without forcing the use of etc-update |
23 |
on each machine, a slower moving stable tree capable of being certified |
24 |
with applications, and most likely a phone number of someone to call |
25 |
when the shit hits the fan. |
26 |
|
27 |
While I will completely agree that Gentoo *can* be used in the |
28 |
enterprise successfully, that does not make it "enterprise-ready", in |
29 |
any sense. Many people also seem to misunderstand the concept of |
30 |
"enterprise" when we are referring to it in this manner. We don't mean |
31 |
"I'm running it on 10 servers in production" or anything like that. We |
32 |
mean "I'm running this as our production platform for Linux services |
33 |
across our entire enterprise, that could be hundreds or even thousands |
34 |
of servers" instead. While it might be possible to maintain a handful |
35 |
of Gentoo servers, it is next to impossible to maintain an army of them, |
36 |
without spending significant up-front manpower to design, test, and |
37 |
implement your own set of management tools. Gentoo has no real |
38 |
management tools. There are a few here and there that do specific |
39 |
tasks, but there isn't anything designed to really take control over |
40 |
your network of systems. To be fair, Red Hat doesn't have anything like |
41 |
this, either. Their "Satellite Server" product is good for initial |
42 |
builds and for updates, but falls short on the management aspects. |
43 |
Novell's offerings are probably the best examples of what we really |
44 |
need. Of course, most people would be happy with even rudimentary |
45 |
management capabilities, as currently, we have none. We don't have any |
46 |
form of update server. You have to build one yourself. We don't have |
47 |
any form of "jump-start" or "kickstart" for rapid automated deployments. |
48 |
You have to build one yourself. Now, we do have the Gentoo Linux |
49 |
Installer project, which has this as one of its goals, so we will have |
50 |
this component at some point in the future. |
51 |
|
52 |
Last, there's the "Our servers just went belly up, and I want to call up |
53 |
someone on the phone and give them a piece of my mind" issue which gives |
54 |
managers a warm, fuzzy feeling, that we cannot provide. If something |
55 |
goes wrong with RHEL or SLES, you call up Red Hat or Novell and get them |
56 |
to work on the problem. If something goes wrong with Gentoo, you hop on |
57 |
IRC, or file a bug, and hope that somebody can help you in the time you |
58 |
need it done in, and not in 3 weeks when the maintaining developer gets |
59 |
back from his tour of the African Dung Beetle in it's own environment. |
60 |
Liability is a big selling point for the enterprise. |
61 |
|
62 |
I work for a telecommunications company, and we run Linux and Solaris. |
63 |
For our Linux, we run Red Hat, even though they have, on staff, one of |
64 |
the people that understands Gentoo's deployment capabilities better than |
65 |
most, via catalyst and the GLI. Why do we run Red Hat? When something |
66 |
breaks with one of their packages, we call them, and expect them to fix |
67 |
it. It is also a name that gives upper management the warm fuzzies. |
68 |
Gentoo has neither the brand recognition, nor the support capabilities |
69 |
to be a good sale to management. |
70 |
|
71 |
I'm not denying that Gentoo is very powerful, flexible, and gives the |
72 |
power back to the administrator, but that doesn't make it enterprise |
73 |
ready or friendly. A few success stories from a few people isn't much |
74 |
to support the position, when we are lacking in so many simple and |
75 |
obvious ways. Remember, if a manager can think of multiple ways to |
76 |
knock down the use of Gentoo, like the ones I've given above, what are |
77 |
you going to do to refute his claims? |
78 |
|
79 |
I want to see Gentoo as an enterprise-capable distribution myself, but I |
80 |
also understand that it is a long, hard road ahead of us, and there will |
81 |
still be some things we simply cannot provide as a community |
82 |
distribution, which was my reasoning behind the "fork". There would |
83 |
need to be an entity that is responsible, liable, if you will, when |
84 |
something goes wrong, and that has the manpower and resources to fix it. |
85 |
|
86 |
-- |
87 |
Chris Gianelloni |
88 |
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager |
89 |
Games - Developer |
90 |
Gentoo Linux |