Ryan! This is great! I use a local VM rather than labs to test out my puppet changes. In the past I've maintained two local working copies of puppet: One for production and the other for my test VM. Now I can use the same working copy for both my VM and for production, woohoo! I can test my puppet changes before I commit them!
-Andrew Otto On Jun 20, 2012, at 1:04 PM, Ryan Lane wrote: >> Reconciling the diff between 'test' and 'production' sounds fantastic. >> But... won't there still be cases where a test branch is needed? For >> example, I sometimes like to run tests on a fresh instance in order to make >> sure that I can build the configuration in a single, clean run. If I can >> only test my changes on a system that has puppetmaster::self installed, then >> that machine is no longer 'fresh'. >> >> Clearly having a per-project puppetmaster (with a project-specific branch) >> is a better solution than having a global test branch... but in the meantime >> I'm not sure I'm ready to give up having a place where I can push patches >> and know that I won't accidentally take the encyclopedia offline. >> > > If puppet runs on the local instance without issues, then it should in > production as well. In production we don't build a server from > scratch. We install it, run puppet, add the classes, then run puppet, > etc. Current servers shouldn't be affected. Also, we'll do code review > before its merged. > > What you mention is a problem, though. The long-term goal is to switch > the repo to use modules, then we can have an environment per branch on > the puppet master. This will take a long, long time, though. > > - Ryan > > _______________________________________________ > Labs-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/labs-l _______________________________________________ Labs-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/labs-l
