On 2/9/2010 5:28 PM, Justin Lloyd wrote:
> Cfengine 3 is young but I think that with a strong community, over time
> the COPBL will develop into something like what you're describing (or
> something more grassroots could emerge, much like CPAN did).
I don't think CPAN could exist without support for something like
packages, namespaces, object references, etc. that keep different
people's work from colliding and a way of version/dependency tracking
that knows how to keep components up to date, even if it is all by
convention. Do those concepts exist for chunks of cfengine code?
> As for the language, it's different because it's not a programming
> language but a platform-independent state definition language,
> basically, and to the best of my knowledge (which is patchy atm) there
> isn't much else out there for describing Unix system configurations.
> It's not an easy thing to do.
It's hard to imagine something that can't be described in perl - or a
seasoned sysadmin that doesn't already know how to do it (perhaps badly,
but odds are good that 90% of the job can be done with existing CPAN
modules...). Suppose you need to work with a process that exposes its
status with xml over http (increasingly common around here). Do you
have to write your own http and xml handling packages to manage it - or
shell out to perl anyway?
--
Les Mikesell
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
Help-cfengine mailing list
[email protected]
https://cfengine.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine
