Open Stack

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 05:10:49PM +0200, Ricardo Carrillo Cruz wrote:
> Interesting, I was not aware of puppetlabs-inifile.
> 
> Anyway, I think Jeremy mentioned to me that the creation of puppet-pip
> class was to manage the python3-python2 differences for
> pip paths (Jeremy can you chime in?)
> The manage pip.conf functionality was added afterwards (I think it was
> Yolanda who added that), but the main intention
> for this class was to install pip (which doesn't work btw).
> 
Ya, would be nice to get a full picture about the usage of puppet-pip. I don't
really follow that module too much.

But, I would look towards puppet-inifile to manage pip.conf over creating yet
another puppet module in -infra :)

> Regards
> 
> 2015-08-12 14:40 GMT+02:00 Paul Belanger <pabelanger at redhat.com>:
> 
> > On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 10:59:35PM +0200, Ricardo Carrillo Cruz wrote:
> > > We have followed this topic on IRC channel, and it seems the consensus so
> > > far
> > > is to:
> > >
> > > 1. Deprecate python-pip from infra modules
> > > 2. Create another module python-pip_settings that just manages pip.conf
> > > (this will typically used for downstream mainly, for proxies whatnot).
> > > 3. Put a note on modules and documentation stating that in order to use
> > > infra modules install_puppet.sh should be run or pip installed prior to
> > > applying the puppet modules
> > >
> > > If there are no objections with the above, I'd start doing refactoring.
> > >
> > I have to admit, I didn't really follow the discussion to much yesterday.
> > However, what was the reason again for not using an existing
> > puppet-python[1]
> > module to do this?
> >
> > Do we really need puppet-pip_setting module or can we just not use the
> > puppet-inifile[2] module to manage pip.conf?
> >
> > Be kind, I haven't had coffee yet.
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/stankevich/puppet-python
> > [2] https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppetlabs-inifile
> >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > 2015-08-11 12:36 GMT+02:00 Ricardo Carrillo Cruz <
> > > ricardo.carrillo.cruz at gmail.com>:
> > >
> > > > I will add this to the infra meeting agenda, since I can't attend due
> > to
> > > > TZ differences.
> > > > Will put some context on what options were discussed on IRC yesterday.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > >
> > > > 2015-08-10 13:56 GMT+02:00 Jeremy Stanley <fungi at yuggoth.org>:
> > > >
> > > >> On 2015-08-10 10:54:28 +0200 (+0200), Ricardo Carrillo Cruz wrote:
> > > >> [...]
> > > >> > I suggest we get rid of puppet-pip from all service puppet modules
> > > >> > (like puppet-zuul) and just use puppet-python for sanity (and also
> > > >> > adding the manage pip.conf functionality to upstream stankevich
> > > >> > puppet-python).
> > > >> [...]
> > > >>
> > > >> It would need to be made optional. On our systems, we want to have a
> > > >> Puppet package provider for pip but we don't want Puppet managing
> > > >> installation of pip because we do that through some fairly
> > > >> convoluted logic to forcibly purge any package-managed pip
> > > >> installation and run a cached copy of the get-pip.py script. See the
> > > >> setup_pip function in the install_puppet.sh script of
> > > >> openstack-infra/system-config for details.
> > > >> --
> > > >> Jeremy Stanley
> > > >>
> > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > >> OpenStack-Infra mailing list
> > > >> OpenStack-Infra at lists.openstack.org
> > > >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > OpenStack-Infra mailing list
> > > OpenStack-Infra at lists.openstack.org
> > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
> >
> >