I'm an opinionated elitist, so my thoughts are: I'm not entirely sure what Puppet uses to set up the cluster. However, Cap ssh's to each server, which is not scalable -- a few hundred brings it to its knees.
On the other hand, Cap defines a DSL in Ruby, whereas Puppet defines its own language for a less flexible config file. PoolParty is the one that really looked interesting, but it's been awhile. Either way, I probably wouldn't mind using the Cap syntax, with some backend other than ssh. On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 4:37 AM, Gerhardus Geldenhuis < [email protected]> wrote: > > Hi > vs might be a bit of a controversial term. I am really interested in > peoples opinions about the overlapping or symbiotic relationship > between capistrano and puppet. If you are using both tools, could you > expand on the relationship between the tools in your usage of them? > > I have some thoughts on the subject but have on purpose not shared the > immediately as I feel that would be a leading question. :-) > > Regards > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/capistrano -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
