On 11/21/2013 04:46 PM, David Caro wrote:
On Thu 21 Nov 2013 03:03:00 PM CET, Itamar Heim wrote:
On 11/21/2013 03:29 PM, Ohad Basan wrote:
+1
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 8:27:39 PM
Subject: Puppet environment name / branch name
Hello,
I just deployed r10k to be the deployment method and it works generally
well. One problem is that it maps branches one to one. Currently I
worked around this by making a symlink, but I think we should rename our
master branch to production. Opinions?
is that common? usually master is named master.
_______________________________________________
Infra mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra
Maybe it's better to change puppet config to use master as the
'production' environment source of manifests. I say that because it's
usually a mess to have a branch that it's not the master as master...
(@work we use development as master in one of the repos, and I always
submit a patch or two a month to master instead xd)
well, one other though is that if you ever intend to have more than a
single branch, master is usually not the stable production one...
_______________________________________________
Infra mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra
