3 ms·
Well, if you're using Chef and just using pre-existing cookbooks I'd say you take away 90% of the power of a CM system. So yeah, probably using Chef you have to
by druiid 14y ago
Well, if you're using Chef and just using pre-existing cookbooks I'd say you take away 90% of the power of a CM system. So yeah, probably using Chef you have to know Ruby, full-stop.
For admins whom have a history with Ruby that's not a huge request, but at the same time I question how useful it is to basically require an admin to code in a particular language to build system configurations (And that is the one thing that drew me to Puppet... that while it had a 'language' it wasn't REALLY a language, more a template syntax).
I can certain agree with the idea of using Chef as an opportunity to learn Ruby and when the day comes I have some spare time to start then it might be a good place to begin using it.
Really though beyond the language aspect, I was wondering what the feature-set that Chef offered over Puppet, things like structural decisions like how nodes are managed, node removal (kind of a sore spot in Puppet right now), etc.
- pjungwir 14y agoI don't know enough about Puppet to compare them, but the impression I got from reading several comparisons a year or two ago was that Puppet had a more mature community and hence better cookbooks, while Chef was better suited to "dynamic" responses, like adding nodes in response to high load. So perhaps Chef has better removal abilities.
- druiid 14y agoWell, the community for Puppet is good, but oddly there are many modules (what Puppet calls a 'cookbook') missing for some relatively trivial things. For instance, I have written about 10 modules now for various system utilities/resources/services now which didn't exist as of yet, or at least were very... ahem... not good. For example, I've basically re-written my own nginx module because the ability to add reverse-proxy caching to server entries didn't exist even in the Puppet Labs nginx module (really, this is a thing)!