Re: [foreman-dev] omnibus packaging
Hi, On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 03:22:24PM -0700, jake.plimack via foreman-dev wrote: > would it be possible to move towards using omnibus packing for theforeman? I'm strongly against this for a broad variety of reasons. I think the whole omnibus approach is very wrong and Puppet's move to AIO packaging was/is also a major downer for me. Regards -- Michael Moll -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "foreman-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [foreman-dev] omnibus packaging
Hello while it would made the packaging easier I don't think it's a very good approach. If there's some security issue found in one of deps, we'd need to build new version of the whole stack because of that. Btw on rpm based systems we use isolated ruby through software collection so it should not interfere with your system ruby. I wonder how you install newer system ruby on your system, if you use tools like rvm/rbenv it's usually explicitly activated only in user shell. -- Marek On čtvrtek 20. dubna 2017 0:22:24 CEST jake.plimack via foreman-dev wrote: > would it be possible to move towards using omnibus packing for theforeman? > i would love it if TF was self-contained with its own ruby and gems in > /opt/foreman much like chef/sensu/etc do. > > i have newer system-ruby on my machines than theforeman requires, so > self-containing all the deps seems like a win-win-win-win as it'll make the > installer platform agnostic and decouple the dependencies from everything > else on the system. > > https://github.com/chef/omnibus -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "foreman-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
