> On 04 Jul 2016, at 13:23, Stuart Henderson <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 2016/07/04 00:23, Joerg Jung wrote: >> Hi, >> >> please find attached a port for bundlewrap 2.6.1 a config management >> tool written in Python. >> >> $ cat pkg/DESCR >> By allowing for easy and low-overhead config management, BundleWrap fills the >> gap between complex deployments using Chef or Puppet and old school system >> administration over SSH. While most other config management systems rely on >> a >> client-server architecture, BundleWrap works off a repository cloned to your >> local machine. It then automates the process of SSHing into your servers and >> making sure everything is configured the way it's supposed to be. You won't >> have to install anything on managed servers. >> >> >> I slightly tested this, and it seems to work fine. Note, for now for the >> remote system to be managed it seems to be expected to have bash and >> sudo installed (hardcoded dependency), but I hope this will change in >> future as there is already a node.os property knowing about OpenBSD and >> thus could use doas/ksh instead (I'll report to upstream). >> >> Comments, OKs? >> >> Regards, >> Joerg > > I don't see much point in providing both py27 and py3 flavours > for an end-user program rather than a python library, I think I would > just hardcode it to py3.
Stupid question: how to hardcode py3 somehow via MODULE variable I guess? Do you have an example port who does this? Others I use (e.g. beets, ansible) are all py2 it seems. > If there is some good reason to keep both flavours then you'll need > to rename the file in bin/ to avoid the conflict between the two, > and should remove the py-futures RDEP from the py3 version. No good reason. Hardcoding py2 or py3 is fine, I think.
