Hi I agree, and why I was expecting to be shown the error of my ways. :) I am still in two minds about where cobbler stops and where puppet starts and where config should be living... the idea/view I have is that cobbler should facilitate building of an OS and puppet should facilitate configuration of an OS but that the data should be a third entity but that is very abstract view of things. Ironically I decided on yaml because I felt it would be easier to read and even more ironic is that I could not get the initial yaml file to work so wrote a json file and then used ruby to convert the json into yaml... another longer term idea was to write a validator that in addition to testing normal parsing would also validate the config file for things like sane ip addresses, duplicate entries etc.
Regards On 31 January 2012 16:20, Michael DeHaan <[email protected]> wrote: > Yeah, that could work, but it's kind of ironic too -- Many people consider > Cobbler to be a lightweight CMDB. > > It used to have a YAML data store, but we moved away from that due to YAML > being annoying for humans to edit (and also for some performance reasons), > with all of the line endings and making it easy to get an error in it. > JSON is more or less the same thing. > > While you don't have all of your nodes in one file, you have them in > multiple files, which is more or less the same thing. > > >
_______________________________________________ cobbler mailing list [email protected] https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/cobbler
