4 ms·
> So right there, just by comparing my declarative configuration with the current system state, it's clearly adding more value than "shell script executer". Ve
by dozzie 9y ago
> So right there, just by comparing my declarative configuration with the current system state, it's clearly adding more value than "shell script executer".
Very little value in this regard. As I said, I could just as easily write
declarative configuration for machine deployment in a shell script.
>> There are many big companies that throw money at dumb processes only to make them running
> You said it can't scale. You're now moving the goalposts to "well, it can scale, but it takes more money".
I'm not moving any goalposts. If a process takes unproportionately more money
or effort for more input, it doesn't scale. Heck, in this case it doesn't
scale even if it takes the amount of resources proportional to the input!
> [...] you keep confusing your own requirements with mine.
I don't. I'm saying that you didn't learn anything significant, and as such,
you would be just as good if you put some thought into how to do exactly the
same with the tools you had (shell scripts). But now you're probably worse
off, because you most probably got misled by Ansible's marketing into
believing it is also a configuration management solution.
- tchaffee 9y ago> if you put some thought into how While you were over there thinking about it, I had already completed the job. Which was my #1 requirement. It doesn't seem like you'll ever understand that different requirements often result in different tool choices, but that's ok. > But now you're probably worse off Probably not. I now have several things automated that I once had to do manually. I may not be the smartest person in tech, but I'm smart enough that if I need a better solution than Ansible at some point in my career then at that point I'll simply learn the better solution. Different requirements = different tool choices.