We deployed Spacewalk a few years ago, and it has worked well for us. In the past year, I installed Foreman 2.x several times before it worked in any appreciable manner.
Once the ‘basic’ install was done, getting Katello content management working was rather simple (thanks to a GREAT writeup I found on the Interwebs after much searching).
However, other features are not as simple to get working (the ‘documentation’ for Foreman is sorely lacking). Remote command execution took some wrangling to get working, (and I don’t trust it) Foreman lacks the concept of “configuration channels” that Spacewalk has, and that’s a huge deal-breaker for us. While I’m find cranking out Ansible playbooks or using other methods, our web master likes having a web interface to his config files, plus the integrated revision tracking, syntax highlighting, and so forth. Same with our DBA and his db config files. With RHEL planning to drop Puppet from Satellite, I’m curious to see what happens next with Foreman. That leaves either Foreman to keep Puppet, or forge ahead with Ansible as the One True Configuration Management Solution within the suite. That’s not necessarily good or bad.
Provisioning integration with Xen and ESXi (we use both) is nice, except you have to remember to change a setting so when you remove a system from Foreman, you don’t remove it from the hypervisor forever. That default is a big mistake and should be the opposite.
As an aside, we recently (30 days ago) pulled an eval license from Redhat for Satellite 6.8, installed on top of RHEL 7.9. For stream-family products (my understanding), RHEL’s stuff ‘just works’, and though it lacks more features (no Xen support to be found, no support for dpkg/deb that I can see), it does offer better documentation. And for $300/year (beer budget), RHEL-supported Satellite would be a better option for some folks, I’d imagine. Finally, given what RHEL did, vis-a-vis C8->C8Stream, I declined to buy the license. We aren’t going to toss a quasi-beta into production as the replacement for C7.
I’m more curious now how Foreman will roll out alongside the successor(s) to CentOS. That’s really the hitch for us, in terms of making decisions. But, the lack of certainty, combined with Foreman being one prickly collection of software, has left us with using Spacewalk 2.10 for probably the next 24-36 months. I pondered Ubuntu as a baseline, but I got buckets of pushback on that, and frankly it’s not a hill I want to die for.
Honestly, while SW 2.x is NOT perfect, it sure seems far more usable and fits a niche better for a smaller enterprise/.edu environment where I don’t have to Control The World, but just need a simple way to manage 100+ systems and give users disinclined to CLI work a way to manage configuration channels.
Thank you for starting this thread. Foreman is probably overall a good tool. But I think in many ways, SW was a better tool.