From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1E0lYp-0006cx-D5 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 04 Aug 2005 19:39:24 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j74Jc1Tf008112; Thu, 4 Aug 2005 19:38:01 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j74JaMDl010811 for ; Thu, 4 Aug 2005 19:36:22 GMT Received: from adsl-67-39-48-193.dsl.milwwi.ameritech.net ([67.39.48.193] helo=exodus) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1E0lWa-000613-GY for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 04 Aug 2005 19:37:05 +0000 Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2005 14:37:17 -0500 From: "Brian D. Harring" To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: where goes Gentoo? Message-ID: <20050804193717.GI21865@exodus> References: <16CC9569DA3E4D41A1D4BC25D7B5A16A491045@hercules.magbank.com> <1123180508.22344.31.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="nOM8ykUjac0mNN89" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1123180508.22344.31.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-Archives-Salt: 266a079d-a46f-4d00-9168-3e52158aef76 X-Archives-Hash: 5876c7f777c36562d66b29f43773633e --nOM8ykUjac0mNN89 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Long one kiddies... responses inlined, bit more interested in=20 discussion of what's required/desired then "your definition of=20 enterprise sucks"... (throws on the flamesuit)... On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 02:35:08PM -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > On Thu, 2005-08-04 at 11:48 -0400, Eric Brown wrote: > > Every business application of Gentoo I've done has been different. I d= on't think I could generalize my needs into a single ebuild. Although gene= rally I have used rsyncd and apache, I never use them in the same way. Wha= t's so hard about using the default rsyncd config, and adding distfiles to = your apache document root? (what 90% of people would use). >=20 > You completely missed the management aspect here. I'm talking about > some form of actual enterprise-ready management framework for > controlling a set of Gentoo servers centrally from deployment to > maintenance and upgrades. Elaborate on what you explicitly want out of portage please- the=20 domain concept (aside from being useful design wise) *should* allow=20 groupping of boxes (groupping of domains really) behind it, so you can=20 effectively have a set of boxes, pushing changes to each. Mind you no code written, but current design is intended to allow=20 remote chunks to be swapped in/out of portagelib on the fly=20 (including the actual portage configuration). > > About automating updates and etc-update: you can rsync your config fil= e 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 d= irs and roll your own custom packages. >=20 > You can... You can... You can... >=20 > All I heard here was a bunch of excuses about how a person can take the > time to implement something that's been implemented by countless other > people, because Gentoo does not provide a framework for doing this. The > whole idea of being enterprise-ready is having a drop-in solution that > works right off the bat, with minimal to no configuration for basic > services. All of your solutions requires manpower to accomplish that > not every enterprise can afford to spend. Once again, this is why > Gentoo is currently not used in these situations. Better angle of discussion rather then "we aren't there yet" is the=20 specifics of what is needed to *get* there in peoples opinion. It's not an overnight thing, glep19 (stable portage tree) addresses a=20 chunk of concerns when/if it's implemented, but I'm a bit more=20 interested in the the other tools people desire alongside. Re: a drop-in solution, considering that gentoo is effectively all=20 over the map (seriously, look at the tree), define the profile for the=20 drop-in; drop-in ftp, drop-in web server, drop-in mosix node... etc. Specifics... Hell, I have yet to see what I would define as a proper solution for=20 config manamagent for N gentoo boxes. NFS solution possibly, but that=20 seems a bit hackish to me. > > This brings me to your last point about calling someone when there are = problems: There are companies that provide Linux services, even Gentoo spe= cific services. Some of these companies might even provide enterprise-grad= e portage mirrors with support for the packages they maintain there. >=20 > I don't think I would stake my company's infrastructure on the reliance > on Bob and Joe's Gentoo Support Hotline, sorry. Not to mention you > haven't actually given a single example of someone who can provide this > level of enterprise support. There's a reason why you haven't given an > example. None exists. Moot point frankly, considering we're all volunteers; someone=20 *could* get off their butts and start up an attempt to provide hand=20 holding (effectively what you're coloring the management arg as)=20 services, but even if they did, the followup arg would be that you=20 can't yet trust this new support company, because they're new. Etc. Basically, we don't have control over that portion, so... what=20 can be mangled that we *do* have control over, and has an effect? >=20 > [snip] > In the computer industry, an enterprise is an organization that uses > computers. In practice, the term is applied much more often to larger > organizations than smaller ones. >=20 > We are using this in practice. Therefore, we are speaking of large > organizations, and not just *any* organization. That's a really crappy description, rather nebulous. :) And... nobody probably cares about loose definitions, 'cause loose=20 definitions are moving targets. Again, specific suggestions/requests=20 would rock. Mentioned management tools, well, get into specifics; pxe network=20 installs/imaging? Single tree/cache for N servers? Ability to push=20 updates out to a specific box, or set of servers? Integration of=20 portage contents db with IDS tools? > Novell has several tools, that when used in combination, form a cohesive > framework for deploying, managing, and upgrading systems. What's even > better, is it isn't just limited to Linux, but I'll leave that as an > exercise for the readers... ;] Novell uses a combination of these > components, such as eDirectory and ZENworks, to form this framework. >=20 > > Maybe we can't rely on portage so much in scenarios where replication i= s the goal... >=20 > Portage really has nothing to do with deployment or management. In > fact, the only thing it really does is package management, which is > probably why it is called a package management tool, and not an > enterprise resource manager. Any enterprise resource manager is going to have to fool with pkgs at=20 some point- that's my line of interest in this. > Sorry, but I'm not calling vapier and listening to him tell me about his > wang when I have an issue with LDAP replication that I need resolved > immediately as my customers are starting to call in quite irate. I > would want a company with a dedicated staff on-hand to support my needs > that is available when I need them. See bit above about being (effectively) outside of our control (a=20 niche someone with a brain could exploit also). Besides, it would be pointless to call vapier to hear wang tales; just=20 stick your head in #gentoo-dev, you get them for free there... > > I wouldn't refute my manager's claims if he controlled my paycheck :D >=20 > Haven't you ever been in a meeting? You know, where they ask your > opinion. Are you a drone? Do you just do everything that you're told > and question nothing? [snip] If it's going to descend into a bit of flaming (has it already?), I'll=20 gladly go back to poking at portage- I'd rather see something constructive = out of this,=20 you obviously see areas where gentoo isn't up to snuff (as do I)...=20 so... what would be useful to implement *now*, what would be required=20 *down the line*, etc. Mind you, our hands aren't bound, their are areas that work can be=20 done in. > Gentoo is currently unmaintainable at this scale without a significant > investment in infrastructure and development to make the system > manageable. Think of it this way, if I can pay 4 developers to work on > this project for 6 months, and each developer makes $50,000 a year, or I > can pay Novell $100,000 and have the system in place in 2 weeks, which > do you think I would do? This is the exact reason why Gentoo is not > used in the enterprise more. There is simply too high a barrier of > entry into making a usable and manageable Gentoo deployment. Or, you find a collection of trained coder monkeys who are oddballs=20 who might have an interest in implementing this stuff on their own=20 time, and try to nudge them in the correct direction; no, this isn't a=20 solution, but again, having an ent. solution (going by your statement)=20 isn't going to be funded by anyone. Ok, fine. So it goes. Meanwhile, reiterating my point, I'd rather see a discussion of what=20 people *want* in the way of tools, then "we aren't there yet". =20 Generally known that you have to roll your own somewhat for tools,=20 well, would rather know what people want then see then another round=20 of kicking the dead horse. ~harring --nOM8ykUjac0mNN89 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFC8m5tvdBxRoA3VU0RAixrAKCDFKUy3GANuN6Wvm8wNfic7GsPkQCeKWVN EQW0+TUvKXkhfdw+jMdcD6I= =IkBO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nOM8ykUjac0mNN89-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list