If you have temporary staff, they would also be interested in having Puppet skills on their CVs .... this is from job adverts trends on indeed.com asking for particular skills in open posts.
> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:owner-scientific- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Graham Allan > Sent: 22 February 2013 17:05 > To: Natxo Asenjo > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: puppet > > On 2/21/2013 4:13 PM, Natxo Asenjo wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 9:38 PM, Graham Allan < > > <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> Also cfengine, though that seems to be getting less fashionable... We > >> still use it, no compelling reasons to change so far! > > > > we take our decisions based on functionality, not fashion. > > > > Cfengine is just fine. Good performance, little dependencies, good > > security record (not unimportant for your infrastructure management > > tool and oh what a start of the year for ruby it was), and it has in > > place editing instead of requiring you to use yet another tool > > (augeas). > > > > But puppet/chef are good products too, just not good enough to justify > > a downgrade from the better one ;-) > > Totally agree, I just meant that puppet does have more mindshare these days > and you'll probably find more people familiar with it. We have used cfengine > for 10+ years, not that we haven't discovered flaws over time but I'm > certainly > very happy with it and see no reason to change. We have had student > sysadmins come in, have to learn cfengine, they also look at puppet, and > comment that cfengine was a good choice. > > Just as we here still write most of our support scripts etc in perl, that is > also > unfashionable now, doesn't mean it's not the best tool for the job (fx: > throws > bomb and runs away... :-) > > Graham
<<image001.jpg>>
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
