[Oneiric-Topic] Puppet Integration

[Clint Byrum]

Excerpts from Adam Gandelman's message of Wed Mar 30 13:04:37 -0700 2011:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 11:10:47AM -0400, Douglas Stanley wrote:
> > > It's been an ongoing topic for while.  I think we really have the
> > > opportunity to differentiate Ubuntu here.  In particular, preseedable
> > > d-i integration would make Ubuntu deployment a completely hands-off
> > > operation.  Again, count me in for that one!
> > >
> > 
> > I'd also like to see this, as well as some possible pre-canned
> > recipes/manifests. Even if they were just in an extra docs package, or
> > on a dedicated wiki section or something like that.
> > 
> > Doug
> > 
> 
> I've been thinking about this, too.  It would be great if users who
> are creating a new puppet-centric infrastructure can start by creating
> a puppet master node with the puppetmaster + new modules package.
> The modules package could contain pre-written modules for common services
> that define and take care of installation, configuration, management, etc.
> If done correctly, the entire environment could be in-place and waiting
> before any additional systems are booted.  Another option would be to have
> additional puppet-* or puppetmasterd-module-* packages, each containing
> a module for a specific service or need.
> 

The logical choice for this would be to take the stuff from puppet forge

http://forge.puppetlabs.com/

And package it all, or at the very least, make sure its very easy and
obvious how to get the modules available there.

> Initially it felt like Puppet was still so new that it was difficult
> to find defined best-practices, but with the publication of the Puppet
> Style Guide ( http://www.puppetlabs.com/blog/a-question-of-style/ ) it
> seems it wouldn't be too hard to develop and ship manifests and modules
> that meet the standards.o

I don't know that we want to get in to the business of developing
manifests. It has proved difficult to keep them generic enough to be
much more than templates.