Open Stack

(sorry, mail client failure)

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Joshua Hesketh <joshua.hesketh at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 1:31 AM, Simon McCartney <simon at mccartney.ie>
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> <snip>
>>
> However, I'm not sure Vagrant provides a good solution for testing puppet
>> modules in isolation (I think it's great for the
>> system-config/project-config scenario, where you want to see how applying
>> the full set of required puppet modules on to an empty VM provides a
>> working system), it's harder to test standing up zuul without also setting
>> up a few other components, so puppet-zuul (for example) may not take
>> advantage of Vagrant directly, but may benefit from beaker[1] or
>> test-kitchen[2] work (I think that conversation has happened before but I
>> wasn't directly involved at the time)
>>
>>
>
 So I think this is the interesting part for vagrant. The infra
bootstrapping will install other components (as mentioned) which is useful
when you want to develop on something intended for OpenStack's infra.
However if we want the puppet modules to be more generic and used outside
of infra's use case, is this sufficient or should we look towards something
more generic (such as vagrant)?

I'm not really sure how this would look as modules may have complicated
inter-dependencies or assumptions about the environment/machine. How do
other puppet developers do their modules upstream?

Cheers,
Josh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-infra/attachments/20160830/df7b3ede/attachment-0001.html>