On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 10:16 AM, Eric Snow <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 5:54 PM, Michael Nelson > <[email protected]> wrote: > > In online-services we've been using ansible together with juju for > > quite a while, and have pushed some generic helpers into charm-helpers > > that allow running a hook to equate to running all tasks in a playbook > > tagged with the hook name [1][2]. After using that for over a year, > > we've also developed some reusable ansible roles which make it much > > easier for us to maintain lots of charms, but ymmv (as they're often > > for specific ways which we need to do things, like deploying code from > > a swift container, or setting up nrpe checks etc.) [3] > > > > Using those ansible helpers within juju really won't allow you to > > simply re-use your ansible playbook, but it's pretty easy to adapt an > > ansible playbook to a charm (ie. just tagging tasks for certain > > relations). > > That's pretty cool stuff. Thanks for sharing that (and doing the > work). It would be great if we could leverage what you've done to be > more visible to customers. Having similar support for Puppet, Chef, > and Salt would be awesome too. It's just a matter of justifying the > resources to get it done... > > michael's done most of the legwork on both ansible and saltstack in charmhelpers [0], although i'm not aware of any public charms that use the saltstack support. For chef, the rails charm is a good example [1]. cheers, Kapil [0] http://micknelson.wordpress.com/2013/06/24/easier-juju-charms-with-python-helpers/ [1] https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~charmers/charms/precise/rails/trunk/files
-- Juju mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
