Hi
I agree, and why I was expecting to be shown the error of my ways. :)

I am still in two minds about where cobbler stops and where puppet starts and where config should be living... the idea/view I have is that cobbler should facilitate building of an OS and puppet should facilitate configuration of an OS but that the data should be a third entity but that is very abstract view of things. Ironically I decided on yaml because I felt it would be easier to read and even more ironic is that I could not get the initial yaml file to work so wrote a json file and then used ruby to convert the json into yaml... another longer term idea was to write a validator that in addition to testing normal parsing would also validate the config file for things like sane ip addresses, duplicate entries etc.

Regards

On 31 January 2012 16:20, Michael DeHaan <michael.dehaan@gmail.com> wrote:
Yeah, that could work, but it's kind of ironic too -- Many people consider Cobbler to be a lightweight CMDB.  

It used to have a YAML data store, but we moved away from that due to YAML being annoying for humans to edit (and also for some performance reasons), with all of the line endings and making it easy to get an error in it.    JSON is more or less the same thing.

While you don't have all of your nodes in one file, you have them in multiple files, which is more or less the same thing.