Fri, 03 Jul 2009
By Puppet or Package
At work we both build our own packages and use puppet to manage our
servers. While the developers package up their work in the systems team
we've moved more to deploying programs and their dependencies via
Puppet.
While it seems easier, and quicker, to do the pushing that way, at least for scripts, you lose the ability to track what's responsible for putting each file on the system. I'm probably already modelling the more complex parts of what would be in a package (such as services and cronjobs) in the module and thanks to Puppet I'm probably doing it in quite a portable way. Is this actually better than using packages? It's certainly easier than building complex packages but it quickly gets awkward when you start needing to deploy compiled binaries or apps with lots of moving parts.
For now my rule seems to be - use puppet for small, non-compiled, apps and package up anything with lots of dependencies or that needs to be compiled. How do you deploy your infrastructure scripts and supporting artifacts?
Like this post? - Digg Me! | Add to del.icio.us! | reddit this!
Posted: 2009/07/03 22:12 | /sysadmin | Permanent link to this entry | This entry and same date
Copyright © 2000-2010 Dean Wilson
