>
>
>
> I feel like the two most common commands I'm going to type interactively
> are
>
> puppet apply
> puppet agent
>
> Is there any way we can pick names that don't both start with 'a' ? :)
>
>
Like I mentioned above, "apply" is generally going to be optional, since if
you supply a filename instead of a command, "apply" will be assumed.
Is that a sufficient workaround?


>
>
> > bin/puppetdoc       => puppet doc
> > sbin/puppetca       => puppet cert
> > sbin/puppetrun      => puppet kick
> > bin/ralsh           => puppet resource
> > sbin/puppetqd       => puppet queue
> > bin/filebucket      => puppet filebucket
> > bin/pi              => puppet describe
> > notes:
> > * I don't think we're ready to change "filebucket"'s name - it's a silly
> > name but the feature needs to have a name that disambiguates it from
> other
> > puppet file/content/checksum subsystems.
> > * "describe"'s functionality might later be merged into "doc".
> > ~Jesse
> > 2010/4/15 Aurélien Degrémont <[email protected]>
> >>
> >> Le 14/04/2010 22:06, Luke Kanies a écrit :
> >>
> >> On Apr 14, 2010, at 12:16 PM, Stéphan Gorget wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 9:07 PM, Jesse Wolfe <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> the new puppet single-executable is in master, but I think the names of
> >>> the commands should be up for discussion. These are something that we
> may
> >>> have to live with for a long time.
> >>>
> >>> Here's what's currently in master:
> >>> bin/filebucket      => puppet filebucket
> >>> bin/pi              => puppet pi
> >>> bin/puppetdoc       => puppet doc
> >>> sbin/puppetca       => puppet ca
> >>> sbin/puppetmasterd  => puppet server
> >>> sbin/puppetrun      => puppet run
> >>> bin/puppet          => puppet main
> >>> bin/ralsh           => puppet resource
> >>> sbin/puppetd        => puppet agent
> >>> sbin/puppetqd       => puppet queue
> >>>
> >>> Here's my commentary:
> >>> bin/pi              => puppet pi (what does "i" stand for, anyway?)
> >>> sbin/puppetmasterd  => puppet server (I'd rather keep the "master"
> >>> jargon)
> >>> bin/puppet          => puppet main (doesn't seem very main to me.
> "exec"?
> >>> "do"?)
> >>> sbin/puppetd        => puppet agent (is "agent" the jargon we use in
> >>> training? I can't remember)
> >>
> >> Why don't we merge puppet and puppetd and use sthg like --local instead
> ?
> >>
> >> In general you need to provide some code for puppet to apply, which
> isn't
> >> the case with puppetd.  Also, there'll basically be an assumption about
> >> both:  puppetd will need to run as root, it'll maintain a catalog, it
> needs
> >> auth credentials, and plenty more.  In contrast, puppet should always be
> >> able to run as a normal user, should have little if any state, and
> probably
> >> doesn't need certificates or any sense of membership to a network.
> >>
> >> Here my uses cases where I think it is not so a difference between the
> two
> >> command (puppetd and puppet)
> >> In our environment, we never used puppetd as a daemon, we always run it
> >> explictly using puppetd -t.
> >> For us, admin are always doing two actions:
> >>
> >> Check my machine/my manifest i just wrote:
> >>
> >> puppetd -t --noop
> >>
> >> Fix the machine configuration, i've just checked
> >>
> >> puppetd -t
> >>
> >> After that, i've got two ways to get my catalog, depending on the access
> I
> >> have to my manifests, through network and puppetmaster or direct file
> >> access, but the action I do is the same: i just want to check/apply my
> >> puppet conf, I wonder why if the source changes, the syntax changes so
> much:
> >>
> >> puppet /etc/puppet/production/manifests/site.pp --manifestdir
> >> /my/very/long/path --modulepath ...
> >>
> >> puppetd -t
> >>
> >> I would be very nice if this could be taken in account into the "single
> >> executable" changes.
> >>
> >>
> >> Aurélien
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Discovery consists of seeing what everybody has seen and thinking what
> >> nobody has thought. -- Albert Szent-Gyorgyi
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Luke Kanies  -|-   http://puppetlabs.com   -|-   +1(615)594-8199
> >> --
> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups
> >> "Puppet Developers" group.
> >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> >> [email protected]<puppet-dev%[email protected]>
> .
> >> For more options, visit this group at
> >> http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en.
> >>
> >> --
> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups
> >> "Puppet Developers" group.
> >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> >> [email protected]<puppet-dev%[email protected]>
> .
> >> For more options, visit this group at
> >> http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en.
> >
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Puppet Developers" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > [email protected]<puppet-dev%[email protected]>
> .
> > For more options, visit this group at
> > http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en.
> >
>
>
>
> --
> nigel
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Puppet Developers" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]<puppet-dev%[email protected]>
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en.

Reply via email to