- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
I just though I’d share
Edit: I’m not sure if this actually works. All else fails fall back to Ansible
I just though I’d share
Edit: I’m not sure if this actually works. All else fails fall back to Ansible
Fucking hell. THAT far back?
We were doing everything Ansible does for the 95% case in 2002. Like, for 95% of use-cases, Ansible is absolutely no better than a conglomeration of tools from 2002. Definitely no reason to pay licensing.
Bonus: since it’s version-agnostic (another win over Ansible if you’ve ever managed Tower/AAP/whatever next week) I’m still using that paradigm today because it works SO well. It’s losing to Cinc or mgmtConfig but only because those are 1 and 2 generations newer than Ansible and do offer distinguishing features.
Ansible is foss, free of cost and requires almost no additional overhead or hardware.
It isn’t the best sometimes but if you have a bunch of machines to manage it works great. (Assuming they aren’t behind a NAT)
Um, why are you stressing foss ? I only ask because the 2002 kit was
‘It’s foss’ isn’t really a selling point, here, since ansible is still outmatched by everything else available – including that gaggle of tools from 22 years ago.
… which was foss.
The only thing Ansible has going for it is momentum; and cult-people who haven’t seen Chef or even that aforementioned tool-bag. Heaven forbid someone sees MgmtConfig converging 1000 machines in under a second immediately after a file is changed on one (ergo no playbook run taking 10 minutes). They’d be crying every day afterward that they were still stuck on worse-than-2002-technology Ansible. At 2002, Ansible pre-dates GOOGLE MAPS for technology; and facebook; and the iPhone. Ansible is the MapQuest Printout of technology.
The new tech is so reactive, it can revert a file back to conformity immediately after it’s saved; before it can be reopened!
AND IT’S STILL OPEN SOURCE. Of course. Because that’s a no-brainer.