1 |
Long one kiddies... responses inlined, bit more interested in |
2 |
discussion of what's required/desired then "your definition of |
3 |
enterprise sucks"... (throws on the flamesuit)... |
4 |
|
5 |
|
6 |
On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 02:35:08PM -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
7 |
> On Thu, 2005-08-04 at 11:48 -0400, Eric Brown wrote: |
8 |
> > Every business application of Gentoo I've done has been different. I don't think I could generalize my needs into a single ebuild. Although generally I have used rsyncd and apache, I never use them in the same way. What's so hard about using the default rsyncd config, and adding distfiles to your apache document root? (what 90% of people would use). |
9 |
> |
10 |
> You completely missed the management aspect here. I'm talking about |
11 |
> some form of actual enterprise-ready management framework for |
12 |
> controlling a set of Gentoo servers centrally from deployment to |
13 |
> maintenance and upgrades. |
14 |
|
15 |
Elaborate on what you explicitly want out of portage please- the |
16 |
domain concept (aside from being useful design wise) *should* allow |
17 |
groupping of boxes (groupping of domains really) behind it, so you can |
18 |
effectively have a set of boxes, pushing changes to each. |
19 |
|
20 |
Mind you no code written, but current design is intended to allow |
21 |
remote chunks to be swapped in/out of portagelib on the fly |
22 |
(including the actual portage configuration). |
23 |
|
24 |
> > About automating updates and etc-update: you can rsync your config file sometimes and just bypass all of the portage stuff. You could mount some config dirs over nfs even. You could even remove config_protect on some dirs and roll your own custom packages. |
25 |
> |
26 |
> You can... You can... You can... |
27 |
> |
28 |
> All I heard here was a bunch of excuses about how a person can take the |
29 |
> time to implement something that's been implemented by countless other |
30 |
> people, because Gentoo does not provide a framework for doing this. The |
31 |
> whole idea of being enterprise-ready is having a drop-in solution that |
32 |
> works right off the bat, with minimal to no configuration for basic |
33 |
> services. All of your solutions requires manpower to accomplish that |
34 |
> not every enterprise can afford to spend. Once again, this is why |
35 |
> Gentoo is currently not used in these situations. |
36 |
|
37 |
Better angle of discussion rather then "we aren't there yet" is the |
38 |
specifics of what is needed to *get* there in peoples opinion. |
39 |
|
40 |
It's not an overnight thing, glep19 (stable portage tree) addresses a |
41 |
chunk of concerns when/if it's implemented, but I'm a bit more |
42 |
interested in the the other tools people desire alongside. |
43 |
|
44 |
Re: a drop-in solution, considering that gentoo is effectively all |
45 |
over the map (seriously, look at the tree), define the profile for the |
46 |
drop-in; drop-in ftp, drop-in web server, drop-in mosix node... etc. |
47 |
|
48 |
Specifics... |
49 |
|
50 |
Hell, I have yet to see what I would define as a proper solution for |
51 |
config manamagent for N gentoo boxes. NFS solution possibly, but that |
52 |
seems a bit hackish to me. |
53 |
|
54 |
> > This brings me to your last point about calling someone when there are problems: There are companies that provide Linux services, even Gentoo specific services. Some of these companies might even provide enterprise-grade portage mirrors with support for the packages they maintain there. |
55 |
> |
56 |
> I don't think I would stake my company's infrastructure on the reliance |
57 |
> on Bob and Joe's Gentoo Support Hotline, sorry. Not to mention you |
58 |
> haven't actually given a single example of someone who can provide this |
59 |
> level of enterprise support. There's a reason why you haven't given an |
60 |
> example. None exists. |
61 |
|
62 |
Moot point frankly, considering we're all volunteers; someone |
63 |
*could* get off their butts and start up an attempt to provide hand |
64 |
holding (effectively what you're coloring the management arg as) |
65 |
services, but even if they did, the followup arg would be that you |
66 |
can't yet trust this new support company, because they're new. |
67 |
Etc. |
68 |
|
69 |
Basically, we don't have control over that portion, so... what |
70 |
can be mangled that we *do* have control over, and has an effect? |
71 |
|
72 |
|
73 |
> |
74 |
> [snip] |
75 |
> In the computer industry, an enterprise is an organization that uses |
76 |
> computers. In practice, the term is applied much more often to larger |
77 |
> organizations than smaller ones. |
78 |
> |
79 |
> We are using this in practice. Therefore, we are speaking of large |
80 |
> organizations, and not just *any* organization. |
81 |
|
82 |
That's a really crappy description, rather nebulous. :) |
83 |
And... nobody probably cares about loose definitions, 'cause loose |
84 |
definitions are moving targets. Again, specific suggestions/requests |
85 |
would rock. |
86 |
|
87 |
Mentioned management tools, well, get into specifics; pxe network |
88 |
installs/imaging? Single tree/cache for N servers? Ability to push |
89 |
updates out to a specific box, or set of servers? Integration of |
90 |
portage contents db with IDS tools? |
91 |
|
92 |
|
93 |
> Novell has several tools, that when used in combination, form a cohesive |
94 |
> framework for deploying, managing, and upgrading systems. What's even |
95 |
> better, is it isn't just limited to Linux, but I'll leave that as an |
96 |
> exercise for the readers... ;] Novell uses a combination of these |
97 |
> components, such as eDirectory and ZENworks, to form this framework. |
98 |
> |
99 |
> > Maybe we can't rely on portage so much in scenarios where replication is the goal... |
100 |
> |
101 |
> Portage really has nothing to do with deployment or management. In |
102 |
> fact, the only thing it really does is package management, which is |
103 |
> probably why it is called a package management tool, and not an |
104 |
> enterprise resource manager. |
105 |
|
106 |
Any enterprise resource manager is going to have to fool with pkgs at |
107 |
some point- that's my line of interest in this. |
108 |
|
109 |
|
110 |
> Sorry, but I'm not calling vapier and listening to him tell me about his |
111 |
> wang when I have an issue with LDAP replication that I need resolved |
112 |
> immediately as my customers are starting to call in quite irate. I |
113 |
> would want a company with a dedicated staff on-hand to support my needs |
114 |
> that is available when I need them. |
115 |
|
116 |
See bit above about being (effectively) outside of our control (a |
117 |
niche someone with a brain could exploit also). |
118 |
|
119 |
Besides, it would be pointless to call vapier to hear wang tales; just |
120 |
stick your head in #gentoo-dev, you get them for free there... |
121 |
|
122 |
> > I wouldn't refute my manager's claims if he controlled my paycheck :D |
123 |
> |
124 |
> Haven't you ever been in a meeting? You know, where they ask your |
125 |
> opinion. Are you a drone? Do you just do everything that you're told |
126 |
> and question nothing? |
127 |
[snip] |
128 |
|
129 |
If it's going to descend into a bit of flaming (has it already?), I'll |
130 |
gladly go back to poking at portage- I'd rather see something constructive out of this, |
131 |
you obviously see areas where gentoo isn't up to snuff (as do I)... |
132 |
so... what would be useful to implement *now*, what would be required |
133 |
*down the line*, etc. |
134 |
|
135 |
Mind you, our hands aren't bound, their are areas that work can be |
136 |
done in. |
137 |
|
138 |
|
139 |
> Gentoo is currently unmaintainable at this scale without a significant |
140 |
> investment in infrastructure and development to make the system |
141 |
> manageable. Think of it this way, if I can pay 4 developers to work on |
142 |
> this project for 6 months, and each developer makes $50,000 a year, or I |
143 |
> can pay Novell $100,000 and have the system in place in 2 weeks, which |
144 |
> do you think I would do? This is the exact reason why Gentoo is not |
145 |
> used in the enterprise more. There is simply too high a barrier of |
146 |
> entry into making a usable and manageable Gentoo deployment. |
147 |
Or, you find a collection of trained coder monkeys who are oddballs |
148 |
who might have an interest in implementing this stuff on their own |
149 |
time, and try to nudge them in the correct direction; no, this isn't a |
150 |
solution, but again, having an ent. solution (going by your statement) |
151 |
isn't going to be funded by anyone. |
152 |
|
153 |
Ok, fine. So it goes. |
154 |
|
155 |
Meanwhile, reiterating my point, I'd rather see a discussion of what |
156 |
people *want* in the way of tools, then "we aren't there yet". |
157 |
Generally known that you have to roll your own somewhat for tools, |
158 |
well, would rather know what people want then see then another round |
159 |
of kicking the dead horse. |
160 |
|
161 |
|
162 |
~harring |