3 ms·

* Why not use transactions? (freebsd jails, linux namespaces) and allow integration testing for the applications in a given environment? Think rspec for integra

* Why not use transactions? (freebsd jails, linux namespaces) and allow integration testing for the applications in a given environment? Think rspec for integration testing applications and rolling back on failure. * Why not modularize chef, right now it's a nightmare to get working, emerge makes a graph about 200 nodes long... I plan on sometime making a puppet / chef alternative because they both seem lacking

atsaloli 15y ago
You might want to take a look at CFEngine too. It's in that puppet/chef family: http://verticalsysadmin.com/blog/uncategorized/relative-origins-of-cfengine-chef-and-puppet http://verticalsysadmin.com/blog/uncategorized/relative-orig... And Bcfg2. Not to discourage you from innovating; just so you know what's out there today.
- nwmcsween 15y ago
  I've looked at cfengine, bfg and others and they all miss the point of what a configuration management system should do, 1. It should be simple, 2. It should have integration testing., 3. It should be simple. None do this or even try to