On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 4:22 PM, Seth Vidal <skvidal(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
On Fri, 19 Oct 2012, Michael Stahnke wrote:
> I (we) completely realize this isn't totally awesome either. This is
> a problem when you have a distributed application that is trying to
> support the widest variety of host populations we can.
> This request was brought to us by community members, Red Hat
> employees, and business partners as well.
> I am happy to discuss other soutions/ideas too though. I am not 100%
> convinced my proposal is the best.
I'm less worried about the people requesting the newness b/c they clearly
want change. I'm worried about the people who run rhel b/c they fear change.
I'm more worried about people with hybrid environments where RHEL is
at the core for Puppet. (and somewhat how RHEL 7 could shake out)
Do you consider it ok to not be able to have Fedora agents check into
a RHEL master?
Perhaps they aren't likely to run epel, except it feels like they will run
epel..... b/c it is pushed so hard by all the el6's.
I agree it is a suboptimal solution. Hey, since you work for puppetlabs - I
have a new idea - make them maintain backward compat with 2.6 :)
Well, yes and no. We are trying very hard with the 3 series to not
break compatibility. 2.6 and even 2.7 had some ambiguous behavior that
is now better defined which does help that.
That solves the problem for everyone, right?
devel mailing list