On Thursday, May 7, 2015 at 2:22:24 PM UTC-5, jcf wrote: > > > On May 1, 2015, at 08:14, jcbollinger <[email protected] <javascript:>> > wrote: > > It would be ideal if every component that is developed on its own cycle > and therefore has its own version number were delivered in its own > package. Package management systems and installation frameworks have long > had mechanisms for dealing with the relationships among these. Indeed, > Fedora is following exactly this approach for their own Puppet packaging. > We covered it already on the dev list, but packaging the various components > separately does not need to present a complicated installation experience. > Furthermore, it solves some of the other issues that have been raised, > especially with respect to versioning the collection as a whole (which > ceases to be relevant). > > > This is the ideal, IMHO — “pkg-add-command -install puppet-4-server.pkg” > installs everything one needs to run a fully-functional environment. > “pkg-add-command -install puppet-4-client.pkg” successfully hides from the > end-user what’s being installed, _recognizes what’s being installed and > acts accordingly_ (see other thread about file permissions and puppet user > active today), and is no more complicated than that if there is no need. >
This is a different facet of the problem than I was talking about, but yes, agreed. Those two facets of ideal packaging are compatible in all the package management systems I care about, though I acknowledge that PL cares about more package management systems than I do. John -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/3dcaed18-4bec-4c81-b021-f51eb2feac8d%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
