Now ansible is a Red Hat product, is foreman using it as a configuration provider?

Juan_Pablo_Lorier · October 18, 2015, 7:40am

That's my simple question. I've been waiting for ansible to be used as an
alternative to puppet, cheff, salt but as there was some kind of conflicts
among the projects (foreman vs ansible), no one answered this before.
I hope now ansible is part of the Red Hat's family, this can change.
Regards

Mario_Gamboa · October 18, 2015, 12:15pm

I have the same question my guess would be for sure but mean we need to
learn now ansible instead of puppet.

···

On Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 6:40:53 PM UTC+11, Juan Pablo Lorier wrote: > > That's my simple question. I've been waiting for ansible to be used as an > alternative to puppet, cheff, salt but as there was some kind of conflicts > among the projects (foreman vs ansible), no one answered this before. > I hope now ansible is part of the Red Hat's family, this can change. > Regards >

ohadlevy · October 18, 2015, 12:23pm

> That's my simple question. I've been waiting for ansible to be used as an
> alternative to puppet, cheff, salt but as there was some kind of conflicts
> among the projects (foreman vs ansible), no one answered this before.
> I hope now ansible is part of the Red Hat's family, this can change.
>

Regarding conflicts between the projects, I just want to clarify that there
was never an issue from foreman side (AFAIK), and have no real idea what
the fuss was about… going forward, I believe our communities overlap
often, and as such it would make sense to integrate the usage-cases / tools

What would you like to see? e.g. an alternative to traditional
configuration mgmt (e.g. puppet/chef/salt) or rather an extension like the
remote execution plugin does? or in other words, can you describe what
exactly would you like to see changing on either one or both projects?

thanks!
Ohad

···

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Juan Pablo Lorier wrote:

Regards

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Foreman users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Juan_Pablo_Lorier · February 26, 2016, 11:02am

Hi Daniel,

I'm aware and that's the reason I didn't make more comments in this thread.
Thanks for your efforts, I'm starting to use the plugins and look forward
to seeing the new features.
Regards

···

El domingo, 18 de octubre de 2015, 4:40:53 (UTC-3), Juan Pablo Lorier escribió: > > That's my simple question. I've been waiting for ansible to be used as an > alternative to puppet, cheff, salt but as there was some kind of conflicts > among the projects (foreman vs ansible), no one answered this before. > I hope now ansible is part of the Red Hat's family, this can change. > Regards >

Mario_Gamboa · October 18, 2015, 12:32pm

Well i would like to see something easy to deploy configuration files via
puppet chef or ansible any technology that allow deploy configuration via
gui and not stress the end users in the use of puppet foreman is great and
need just more simplicity in some areas i know is hard work but who know
could be the next gen tool for deployment and automatization anything and
everything windows linux bsd mac that would be awesome is that happen.

···

On Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 11:23:15 PM UTC+11, ohad wrote: > > > > On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Juan Pablo Lorier > wrote: > >> That's my simple question. I've been waiting for ansible to be used as an >> alternative to puppet, cheff, salt but as there was some kind of conflicts >> among the projects (foreman vs ansible), no one answered this before. >> I hope now ansible is part of the Red Hat's family, this can change. >> > > Regarding conflicts between the projects, I just want to clarify that > there was never an issue from foreman side (AFAIK), and have no real idea > what the fuss was about... going forward, I believe our communities > overlap often, and as such it would make sense to integrate the usage-cases > / tools > > What would you like to see? e.g. an alternative to traditional > configuration mgmt (e.g. puppet/chef/salt) or rather an extension like the > remote execution plugin does? or in other words, can you describe what > exactly would you like to see changing on either one or both projects? > > thanks! > Ohad > > > > >> Regards >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Foreman users" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to foreman-user...@googlegroups.com . >> To post to this group, send email to forema...@googlegroups.com >> . >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > >

Juan_Pablo_Lorier · October 19, 2015, 11:00am

Hi Ohad,

I’d like to see a new provider for configuration management. I know there’s remote execution but though it has the simplicity of using scripts, it lacks the power of tools like ansible.
We know that Red Hat buying Ansible is not by chance, but for it been widly adopted.
Regards,

···

> El 18 oct. 2015, a las 9:23 a.m., Ohad Levy escribió: > > > > On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Juan Pablo Lorier <jplorier@gmail.com > wrote: > That's my simple question. I've been waiting for ansible to be used as an alternative to puppet, cheff, salt but as there was some kind of conflicts among the projects (foreman vs ansible), no one answered this before. > I hope now ansible is part of the Red Hat's family, this can change. > > Regarding conflicts between the projects, I just want to clarify that there was never an issue from foreman side (AFAIK), and have no real idea what the fuss was about... going forward, I believe our communities overlap often, and as such it would make sense to integrate the usage-cases / tools > > What would you like to see? e.g. an alternative to traditional configuration mgmt (e.g. puppet/chef/salt) or rather an extension like the remote execution plugin does? or in other words, can you describe what exactly would you like to see changing on either one or both projects? > > thanks! > Ohad > > > > Regards > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com . > To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com . > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout . > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/foreman-users/GnrH3JabRSk/unsubscribe . > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com . > To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com . > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .

iNecas · October 19, 2015, 12:21pm

> Hi Ohad,

> I’d like to see a new provider for configuration management. I know there’s
> remote execution but though it has the simplicity of using scripts, it lacks
> the power of tools like ansible.

Just to clarify this: the remote execution plugin is not just about running a simple script.
From the day one, we're talking about multi-provider support, and although, the job
templates are just shell scripts, no one is saying it couldn't be used for defining
a run of ansible playbook: from the remote execution point of view it's just different
way how you structure the data so that the provider is happy about that. Even making
the Foreman Remote Execution to run a playbook across mutiple roles is possible pretty easily.

Right now, it's hard to tell for sure which direction the integration will go, and even this conversation
is giving it some shapes, more of them will come shortly for sure.

Regardless of the direction, if some folks are confused right now, there is no need to worry,
it's time to celebrate. Good things so far:

an open-source company acquired an almost open-source company: we can expect
more open-sourcing and definitely no close-sourcing
it's in best Red Hat interests to make sure we integrate together in a meaning full way
it's much easier to collaborate once folks don't work for competing companies (although
we proved that even the other case is possible)

– Ivan

···

----- Original Message -----

We know that Red Hat buying Ansible is not by chance, but for it been widly
adopted.
Regards,

El 18 oct. 2015, a las 9:23 a.m., Ohad Levy < ohadlevy@gmail.com > > > escribió:

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Juan Pablo Lorier < jplorier@gmail.com > > > wrote:

That’s my simple question. I’ve been waiting for ansible to be used as an
alternative to puppet, cheff, salt but as there was some kind of
conflicts
among the projects (foreman vs ansible), no one answered this before.

I hope now ansible is part of the Red Hat’s family, this can change.

Regarding conflicts between the projects, I just want to clarify that there
was never an issue from foreman side (AFAIK), and have no real idea what
the
fuss was about… going forward, I believe our communities overlap often,
and as such it would make sense to integrate the usage-cases / tools

What would you like to see? e.g. an alternative to traditional
configuration
mgmt (e.g. puppet/chef/salt) or rather an extension like the remote
execution plugin does? or in other words, can you describe what exactly
would you like to see changing on either one or both projects?

thanks!

Ohad

Regards

–

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Foreman users" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .

To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com .

Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users .

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .

–

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
Google
Groups “Foreman users” group.

To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/foreman-users/GnrH3JabRSk/unsubscribe .

To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .

To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com .

Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users .

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Foreman users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .
To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com .
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .

ohadlevy · October 19, 2015, 11:54am

> Hi Ohad,
>
> I’d like to see a new provider for configuration management. I know
> there’s remote execution but though it has the simplicity of using scripts,
> it lacks the power of tools like ansible.
> We know that Red Hat buying Ansible is not by chance, but for it been
> widly adopted.
>

How would you map the foreman objects to Ansible objects? or rather where
do you see a gap which connecting the two can solve?

Thanks,
Ohad

···

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Juan Pablo Lorier wrote:

Regards,

El 18 oct. 2015, a las 9:23 a.m., Ohad Levy ohadlevy@gmail.com escribió:

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Juan Pablo Lorier jplorier@gmail.com > wrote:

That’s my simple question. I’ve been waiting for ansible to be used as an
alternative to puppet, cheff, salt but as there was some kind of conflicts
among the projects (foreman vs ansible), no one answered this before.
I hope now ansible is part of the Red Hat’s family, this can change.

Regarding conflicts between the projects, I just want to clarify that
there was never an issue from foreman side (AFAIK), and have no real idea
what the fuss was about… going forward, I believe our communities
overlap often, and as such it would make sense to integrate the usage-cases
/ tools

What would you like to see? e.g. an alternative to traditional
configuration mgmt (e.g. puppet/chef/salt) or rather an extension like the
remote execution plugin does? or in other words, can you describe what
exactly would you like to see changing on either one or both projects?

thanks!
Ohad

Regards

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Foreman users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
Google Groups “Foreman users” group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/foreman-users/GnrH3JabRSk/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Foreman users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Juan_Pablo_Lorier · October 19, 2015, 12:06pm

I think you are talking of ansible tower integration, while I’m just thinking of ansible as a sustitute of puppet.
Am I right?
Regards,

···

> El 19 oct. 2015, a las 8:54 a.m., Ohad Levy escribió: > > > > On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Juan Pablo Lorier <jplorier@gmail.com > wrote: > Hi Ohad, > > I’d like to see a new provider for configuration management. I know there’s remote execution but though it has the simplicity of using scripts, it lacks the power of tools like ansible. > We know that Red Hat buying Ansible is not by chance, but for it been widly adopted. > > How would you map the foreman objects to Ansible objects? or rather where do you see a gap which connecting the two can solve? > > Thanks, > Ohad > Regards, > >> El 18 oct. 2015, a las 9:23 a.m., Ohad Levy <ohadlevy@gmail.com > escribió: >> >> >> >> On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Juan Pablo Lorier <jplorier@gmail.com > wrote: >> That's my simple question. I've been waiting for ansible to be used as an alternative to puppet, cheff, salt but as there was some kind of conflicts among the projects (foreman vs ansible), no one answered this before. >> I hope now ansible is part of the Red Hat's family, this can change. >> >> Regarding conflicts between the projects, I just want to clarify that there was never an issue from foreman side (AFAIK), and have no real idea what the fuss was about... going forward, I believe our communities overlap often, and as such it would make sense to integrate the usage-cases / tools >> >> What would you like to see? e.g. an alternative to traditional configuration mgmt (e.g. puppet/chef/salt) or rather an extension like the remote execution plugin does? or in other words, can you describe what exactly would you like to see changing on either one or both projects? >> >> thanks! >> Ohad >> >> >> >> Regards >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com . >> To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com . >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users . >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout . >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. >> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/foreman-users/GnrH3JabRSk/unsubscribe . >> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com . >> To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com . >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users . >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout . > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com . > To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com . > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout . > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/foreman-users/GnrH3JabRSk/unsubscribe . > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com . > To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com . > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .

Juan_Pablo_Lorier · October 19, 2015, 12:29pm

Ivan,

I’m glad to hear that remote execution may easily integrate the playbook. I actually never used the plugin and though I know it has great potential and I love the idea of using simple scripts to do tasks at scheduled times, I thought it was not thought to compete with Ansible.

I’m aware of Red Hat’s mind, I’ve been working with Red Hat’s products for many years now and I’ve seen how other projects are embraced into Red Hat’s family (ovirt as an example).
I was really happy to hear the news as I actully was trying to convince people to integrate with ansible though there was personal problemas among the teams (maybe just a mith, but it was everybodie’s anwer).
Regards,

···

> El 19 oct. 2015, a las 9:21 a.m., Ivan Necas escribió: > > > > Hi Ohad, > > I’d like to see a new provider for configuration management. I know there’s remote execution but though it has the simplicity of using scripts, it lacks the power of tools like ansible. > > Just to clarify this: the remote execution plugin is not just about running a simple script. > From the day one, we're talking about multi-provider support, and although, the job > templates are just shell scripts, no one is saying it couldn't be used for defining > a run of ansible playbook: from the remote execution point of view it's just different > way how you structure the data so that the provider is happy about that. Even making > the Foreman Remote Execution to run a playbook across mutiple roles is possible pretty easily. > > Right now, it's hard to tell for sure which direction the integration will go, and even this conversation > is giving it some shapes, more of them will come shortly for sure. > > Regardless of the direction, if some folks are confused right now, there is no need to worry, > it's time to celebrate. Good things so far: > > 1. an open-source company acquired an almost open-source company: we can expect > more open-sourcing and definitely no close-sourcing > > 2. it's in best Red Hat interests to make sure we integrate together in a meaning full way > > 3. it's much easier to collaborate once folks don't work for competing companies (although > we proved that even the other case is possible) > > -- Ivan > We know that Red Hat buying Ansible is not by chance, but for it been widly adopted. > Regards, > > El 18 oct. 2015, a las 9:23 a.m., Ohad Levy <ohadlevy@gmail.com > escribió: > > > > On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Juan Pablo Lorier <jplorier@gmail.com > wrote: > That's my simple question. I've been waiting for ansible to be used as an alternative to puppet, cheff, salt but as there was some kind of conflicts among the projects (foreman vs ansible), no one answered this before. > I hope now ansible is part of the Red Hat's family, this can change. > > Regarding conflicts between the projects, I just want to clarify that there was never an issue from foreman side (AFAIK), and have no real idea what the fuss was about... going forward, I believe our communities overlap often, and as such it would make sense to integrate the usage-cases / tools > > What would you like to see? e.g. an alternative to traditional configuration mgmt (e.g. puppet/chef/salt) or rather an extension like the remote execution plugin does? or in other words, can you describe what exactly would you like to see changing on either one or both projects? > > thanks! > Ohad > > > Regards > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com . > To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com . > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout . > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/foreman-users/GnrH3JabRSk/unsubscribe . > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com . > To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com . > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout . > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com . > To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com . > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout . > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/foreman-users/GnrH3JabRSk/unsubscribe . > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com . > To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com . > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .

ohadlevy · October 19, 2015, 12:12pm

> I think you are talking of ansible tower integration, while I’m just
> thinking of ansible as a sustitute of puppet.
> Am I right?
>

I assume there is more than one way

Scenario 1 - Ansible is another CM system
playbook = puppet module
Ansible Job output = Report
…

Scenario 2 - Ansible is a Remote Execution Provider
instead of SSH use ansible to deploy, can generate playbooks via templates,
with user input per template/playbook etc

Scenario 3 - Ansible Tower as an API integeration point
Talk to Ansible tower over API just as talking to a compute resource over
API.

How do you see each option? which parts make sense (or no sense at all)?

Ohad

···

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 3:06 PM, Juan Pablo Lorier wrote:

Regards,

El 19 oct. 2015, a las 8:54 a.m., Ohad Levy ohadlevy@gmail.com escribió:

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Juan Pablo Lorier jplorier@gmail.com > wrote:

Hi Ohad,

I’d like to see a new provider for configuration management. I know
there’s remote execution but though it has the simplicity of using scripts,
it lacks the power of tools like ansible.
We know that Red Hat buying Ansible is not by chance, but for it been
widly adopted.

How would you map the foreman objects to Ansible objects? or rather where
do you see a gap which connecting the two can solve?

Thanks,
Ohad

Regards,

El 18 oct. 2015, a las 9:23 a.m., Ohad Levy ohadlevy@gmail.com >> escribió:

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Juan Pablo Lorier jplorier@gmail.com >> wrote:

That’s my simple question. I’ve been waiting for ansible to be used as
an alternative to puppet, cheff, salt but as there was some kind of
conflicts among the projects (foreman vs ansible), no one answered this
before.
I hope now ansible is part of the Red Hat’s family, this can change.

Regarding conflicts between the projects, I just want to clarify that
there was never an issue from foreman side (AFAIK), and have no real idea
what the fuss was about… going forward, I believe our communities
overlap often, and as such it would make sense to integrate the usage-cases
/ tools

What would you like to see? e.g. an alternative to traditional
configuration mgmt (e.g. puppet/chef/salt) or rather an extension like the
remote execution plugin does? or in other words, can you describe what
exactly would you like to see changing on either one or both projects?

thanks!
Ohad

Regards

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups “Foreman users” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
Google Groups “Foreman users” group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/foreman-users/GnrH3JabRSk/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Foreman users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
Google Groups “Foreman users” group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/foreman-users/GnrH3JabRSk/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Foreman users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Juan_Pablo_Lorier · October 19, 2015, 12:21pm

The first is the one I was expecting.
The remote execution to me was the alternative to using ansible within foreman without actually integrating ansible.
The scenario 3 looks like a second step, after using ansible as a CM. I think that integrating to tower may give another tool for those that already have tower implemented and as both foreman and tower overlap in many aspects, it may help to migrate from tower to foreman.
I don’t know what Red Hat plans for ansible and I think that is most likely that tower may get merged into foreman so there’s no duplicated efforts, but that’s just my presumption.
Regards

···

> El 19 oct. 2015, a las 9:12 a.m., Ohad Levy escribió: > > > > On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 3:06 PM, Juan Pablo Lorier <jplorier@gmail.com > wrote: > I think you are talking of ansible tower integration, while I’m just thinking of ansible as a sustitute of puppet. > Am I right? > > I assume there is more than one way :) > > Scenario 1 - Ansible is another CM system > playbook = puppet module > Ansible Job output = Report > ... > > Scenario 2 - Ansible is a Remote Execution Provider > instead of SSH use ansible to deploy, can generate playbooks via templates, with user input per template/playbook etc > > Scenario 3 - Ansible Tower as an API integeration point > Talk to Ansible tower over API just as talking to a compute resource over API. > > > How do you see each option? which parts make sense (or no sense at all)? > > Ohad > > Regards, > >> El 19 oct. 2015, a las 8:54 a.m., Ohad Levy <ohadlevy@gmail.com > escribió: >> >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Juan Pablo Lorier <jplorier@gmail.com > wrote: >> Hi Ohad, >> >> I’d like to see a new provider for configuration management. I know there’s remote execution but though it has the simplicity of using scripts, it lacks the power of tools like ansible. >> We know that Red Hat buying Ansible is not by chance, but for it been widly adopted. >> >> How would you map the foreman objects to Ansible objects? or rather where do you see a gap which connecting the two can solve? >> >> Thanks, >> Ohad >> Regards, >> >>> El 18 oct. 2015, a las 9:23 a.m., Ohad Levy <ohadlevy@gmail.com > escribió: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Juan Pablo Lorier <jplorier@gmail.com > wrote: >>> That's my simple question. I've been waiting for ansible to be used as an alternative to puppet, cheff, salt but as there was some kind of conflicts among the projects (foreman vs ansible), no one answered this before. >>> I hope now ansible is part of the Red Hat's family, this can change. >>> >>> Regarding conflicts between the projects, I just want to clarify that there was never an issue from foreman side (AFAIK), and have no real idea what the fuss was about... going forward, I believe our communities overlap often, and as such it would make sense to integrate the usage-cases / tools >>> >>> What would you like to see? e.g. an alternative to traditional configuration mgmt (e.g. puppet/chef/salt) or rather an extension like the remote execution plugin does? or in other words, can you describe what exactly would you like to see changing on either one or both projects? >>> >>> thanks! >>> Ohad >>> >>> >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com . >>> To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com . >>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users . >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout . >>> >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/foreman-users/GnrH3JabRSk/unsubscribe . >>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com . >>> To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com . >>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users . >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout . >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com . >> To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com . >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users . >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout . >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. >> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/foreman-users/GnrH3JabRSk/unsubscribe . >> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com . >> To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com . >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users . >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout . > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com . > To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com . > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout . > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/foreman-users/GnrH3JabRSk/unsubscribe . > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com . > To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com . > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .

ohadlevy · October 19, 2015, 12:24pm

> The first is the one I was expecting.
>

OK, so would you like to see ansible reports just as puppet reports?
ansible inventory just as facts etc?
How would you handle playbooks that cross servers? I assume you dont
operate on a single host on that usage case?

Ohad

···

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 3:21 PM, Juan Pablo Lorier wrote:

The remote execution to me was the alternative to using ansible within
foreman without actually integrating ansible.
The scenario 3 looks like a second step, after using ansible as a CM. I
think that integrating to tower may give another tool for those that
already have tower implemented and as both foreman and tower overlap in
many aspects, it may help to migrate from tower to foreman.
I don’t know what Red Hat plans for ansible and I think that is most
likely that tower may get merged into foreman so there’s no duplicated
efforts, but that’s just my presumption.
Regards

El 19 oct. 2015, a las 9:12 a.m., Ohad Levy ohadlevy@gmail.com escribió:

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 3:06 PM, Juan Pablo Lorier jplorier@gmail.com > wrote:

I think you are talking of ansible tower integration, while I’m just
thinking of ansible as a sustitute of puppet.
Am I right?

I assume there is more than one way

Scenario 1 - Ansible is another CM system
playbook = puppet module
Ansible Job output = Report
…

Scenario 2 - Ansible is a Remote Execution Provider
instead of SSH use ansible to deploy, can generate playbooks via
templates, with user input per template/playbook etc

Scenario 3 - Ansible Tower as an API integeration point
Talk to Ansible tower over API just as talking to a compute resource over
API.

How do you see each option? which parts make sense (or no sense at all)?

Ohad

Regards,

El 19 oct. 2015, a las 8:54 a.m., Ohad Levy ohadlevy@gmail.com >> escribió:

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Juan Pablo Lorier jplorier@gmail.com >> wrote:

Hi Ohad,

I’d like to see a new provider for configuration management. I know
there’s remote execution but though it has the simplicity of using scripts,
it lacks the power of tools like ansible.
We know that Red Hat buying Ansible is not by chance, but for it been
widly adopted.

How would you map the foreman objects to Ansible objects? or rather where
do you see a gap which connecting the two can solve?

Thanks,
Ohad

Regards,

El 18 oct. 2015, a las 9:23 a.m., Ohad Levy ohadlevy@gmail.com >>> escribió:

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Juan Pablo Lorier jplorier@gmail.com >>> wrote:

That’s my simple question. I’ve been waiting for ansible to be used as
an alternative to puppet, cheff, salt but as there was some kind of
conflicts among the projects (foreman vs ansible), no one answered this
before.
I hope now ansible is part of the Red Hat’s family, this can change.

Regarding conflicts between the projects, I just want to clarify that
there was never an issue from foreman side (AFAIK), and have no real idea
what the fuss was about… going forward, I believe our communities
overlap often, and as such it would make sense to integrate the usage-cases
/ tools

What would you like to see? e.g. an alternative to traditional
configuration mgmt (e.g. puppet/chef/salt) or rather an extension like the
remote execution plugin does? or in other words, can you describe what
exactly would you like to see changing on either one or both projects?

thanks!
Ohad

Regards

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups “Foreman users” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
Google Groups “Foreman users” group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/foreman-users/GnrH3JabRSk/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups “Foreman users” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
Google Groups “Foreman users” group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/foreman-users/GnrH3JabRSk/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Foreman users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
Google Groups “Foreman users” group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/foreman-users/GnrH3JabRSk/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Foreman users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

lzap · October 19, 2015, 2:48pm

> How do you see each option? which parts make sense (or no sense at all)?

I think both 1 and 2 make sense. Ansible is actually an orchestrator
with configuration mgmt capabilities. The more we can leverage from the
tool the better.

···

-- Later, Lukas #lzap Zapletal

iNecas · October 19, 2015, 1:01pm

> I think that a mapping like that can be made. Right now, we use playbooks (I
> myself am not creating them, but use them) with “facts” that decide the flow
> of the playbook based on the server data. We use it somehow like a puppet
> class, but here, the people finds ansible playbooks more friendly to code
> than puppet classes. That’s why all this fuss about.
> I hope I got “cross servers” right, meaning that a single playbook can be
> applied to several servers.

It seems people like to use Ansible for two reasons: more user friendly to developers than puppet classes. And that is allows
to run the playbook across multiple hosts with different roles, such as multi-hosts lamp stack [1]. In
"Ansible as a config provider", I'm not sure how the mapping works in this case. Therefore, I like to think
about playbooks as a ssh on steroids, structured and supporting multiple-hosts, rather than
a definition of a single host, that converges the host every 30 minutes to the state.

[1] - https://github.com/ansible/ansible-examples/blob/master/lamp_haproxy/site.yml

– Ivan

···

----- Original Message -----

Right now, we use the playbooks to help deploy vms, and we have plans to
integrate forman with vmware Director to make it another compute provider(
Of course, we are going to contribute with the code when time comes and we
get this project a green light.).
Regards,

El 19 oct. 2015, a las 9:24 a.m., Ohad Levy < ohadlevy@gmail.com > > > escribió:

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 3:21 PM, Juan Pablo Lorier < jplorier@gmail.com > > > wrote:

The first is the one I was expecting.

OK, so would you like to see ansible reports just as puppet reports?
ansible
inventory just as facts etc?

How would you handle playbooks that cross servers? I assume you dont
operate
on a single host on that usage case?

Ohad

The remote execution to me was the alternative to using ansible within
foreman without actually integrating ansible.

The scenario 3 looks like a second step, after using ansible as a CM. I
think
that integrating to tower may give another tool for those that already
have
tower implemented and as both foreman and tower overlap in many aspects,
it
may help to migrate from tower to foreman.

I don’t know what Red Hat plans for ansible and I think that is most
likely
that tower may get merged into foreman so there’s no duplicated efforts,
but
that’s just my presumption.

Regards

El 19 oct. 2015, a las 9:12 a.m., Ohad Levy < ohadlevy@gmail.com > > > > > escribió:

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 3:06 PM, Juan Pablo Lorier < jplorier@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > wrote:

I think you are talking of ansible tower integration, while I’m just
thinking
of ansible as a sustitute of puppet.

Am I right?

I assume there is more than one way

Scenario 1 - Ansible is another CM system

playbook = puppet module

Ansible Job output = Report

…

Scenario 2 - Ansible is a Remote Execution Provider

instead of SSH use ansible to deploy, can generate playbooks via
templates,
with user input per template/playbook etc

Scenario 3 - Ansible Tower as an API integeration point

Talk to Ansible tower over API just as talking to a compute resource
over
API.

How do you see each option? which parts make sense (or no sense at
all)?

Ohad

Regards,

El 19 oct. 2015, a las 8:54 a.m., Ohad Levy < ohadlevy@gmail.com > > > > > > > escribió:

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Juan Pablo Lorier < > > > > > > jplorier@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:

Hi Ohad,

I’d like to see a new provider for configuration management. I
know
there’s
remote execution but though it has the simplicity of using
scripts,
it
lacks
the power of tools like ansible.

We know that Red Hat buying Ansible is not by chance, but for it
been
widly
adopted.

How would you map the foreman objects to Ansible objects? or rather
where
do
you see a gap which connecting the two can solve?

Thanks,

Ohad

Regards,

El 18 oct. 2015, a las 9:23 a.m., Ohad Levy < > > > > > > > > ohadlevy@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > escribió:

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Juan Pablo Lorier < > > > > > > > > jplorier@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:

That’s my simple question. I’ve been waiting for ansible to
be
used
as
an
alternative to puppet, cheff, salt but as there was some kind
of
conflicts
among the projects (foreman vs ansible), no one answered this
before.

I hope now ansible is part of the Red Hat’s family, this can
change.

Regarding conflicts between the projects, I just want to
clarify
that
there
was never an issue from foreman side (AFAIK), and have no real
idea
what
the
fuss was about… going forward, I believe our communities
overlap
often,
and as such it would make sense to integrate the usage-cases /
tools

What would you like to see? e.g. an alternative to traditional
configuration
mgmt (e.g. puppet/chef/salt) or rather an extension like the
remote
execution plugin does? or in other words, can you describe what
exactly
would you like to see changing on either one or both projects?

thanks!

Ohad

Regards

–

You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google
Groups
"Foreman users" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from
it,
send
an
email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .

To post to this group, send email to
foreman-users@googlegroups.com
.

Visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users
.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .

–

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic
in
the
Google
Groups “Foreman users” group.

To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/foreman-users/GnrH3JabRSk/unsubscribe
.

To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an
email
to
foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .

To post to this group, send email to
foreman-users@googlegroups.com
.

Visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users
.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .

–

You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google
Groups
"Foreman users" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send
an
email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .

To post to this group, send email to
foreman-users@googlegroups.com
.

Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users
.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .

–

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in
the
Google
Groups “Foreman users” group.

To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/foreman-users/GnrH3JabRSk/unsubscribe
.

To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .

To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com
.

Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users .

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .

–

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups
"Foreman users" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send
an
email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .

To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com .

Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users .

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .

–

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
Google
Groups “Foreman users” group.

To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/foreman-users/GnrH3JabRSk/unsubscribe
.

To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .

To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com .

Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users .

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .

–

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Foreman users" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .

To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com .

Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users .

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .

–

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
Google
Groups “Foreman users” group.

To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/foreman-users/GnrH3JabRSk/unsubscribe .

To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .

To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com .

Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users .

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Foreman users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .
To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com .
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .

Juan_Pablo_Lorier · October 19, 2015, 12:36pm

I think that a mapping like that can be made. Right now, we use playbooks (I myself am not creating them, but use them) with “facts” that decide the flow of the playbook based on the server data. We use it somehow like a puppet class, but here, the people finds ansible playbooks more friendly to code than puppet classes. That’s why all this fuss about.
I hope I got “cross servers” right, meaning that a single playbook can be applied to several servers.
Right now, we use the playbooks to help deploy vms, and we have plans to integrate forman with vmware Director to make it another compute provider( Of course, we are going to contribute with the code when time comes and we get this project a green light.).
Regards,

···

> El 19 oct. 2015, a las 9:24 a.m., Ohad Levy escribió: > > > > On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 3:21 PM, Juan Pablo Lorier <jplorier@gmail.com > wrote: > The first is the one I was expecting. > > OK, so would you like to see ansible reports just as puppet reports? ansible inventory just as facts etc? > How would you handle playbooks that cross servers? I assume you dont operate on a single host on that usage case? > > Ohad > > The remote execution to me was the alternative to using ansible within foreman without actually integrating ansible. > The scenario 3 looks like a second step, after using ansible as a CM. I think that integrating to tower may give another tool for those that already have tower implemented and as both foreman and tower overlap in many aspects, it may help to migrate from tower to foreman. > I don’t know what Red Hat plans for ansible and I think that is most likely that tower may get merged into foreman so there’s no duplicated efforts, but that’s just my presumption. > Regards > >> El 19 oct. 2015, a las 9:12 a.m., Ohad Levy <ohadlevy@gmail.com > escribió: >> >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 3:06 PM, Juan Pablo Lorier <jplorier@gmail.com > wrote: >> I think you are talking of ansible tower integration, while I’m just thinking of ansible as a sustitute of puppet. >> Am I right? >> >> I assume there is more than one way :) >> >> Scenario 1 - Ansible is another CM system >> playbook = puppet module >> Ansible Job output = Report >> ... >> >> Scenario 2 - Ansible is a Remote Execution Provider >> instead of SSH use ansible to deploy, can generate playbooks via templates, with user input per template/playbook etc >> >> Scenario 3 - Ansible Tower as an API integeration point >> Talk to Ansible tower over API just as talking to a compute resource over API. >> >> >> How do you see each option? which parts make sense (or no sense at all)? >> >> Ohad >> >> Regards, >> >>> El 19 oct. 2015, a las 8:54 a.m., Ohad Levy <ohadlevy@gmail.com > escribió: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Juan Pablo Lorier <jplorier@gmail.com > wrote: >>> Hi Ohad, >>> >>> I’d like to see a new provider for configuration management. I know there’s remote execution but though it has the simplicity of using scripts, it lacks the power of tools like ansible. >>> We know that Red Hat buying Ansible is not by chance, but for it been widly adopted. >>> >>> How would you map the foreman objects to Ansible objects? or rather where do you see a gap which connecting the two can solve? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Ohad >>> Regards, >>> >>>> El 18 oct. 2015, a las 9:23 a.m., Ohad Levy <ohadlevy@gmail.com > escribió: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Juan Pablo Lorier <jplorier@gmail.com > wrote: >>>> That's my simple question. I've been waiting for ansible to be used as an alternative to puppet, cheff, salt but as there was some kind of conflicts among the projects (foreman vs ansible), no one answered this before. >>>> I hope now ansible is part of the Red Hat's family, this can change. >>>> >>>> Regarding conflicts between the projects, I just want to clarify that there was never an issue from foreman side (AFAIK), and have no real idea what the fuss was about... going forward, I believe our communities overlap often, and as such it would make sense to integrate the usage-cases / tools >>>> >>>> What would you like to see? e.g. an alternative to traditional configuration mgmt (e.g. puppet/chef/salt) or rather an extension like the remote execution plugin does? or in other words, can you describe what exactly would you like to see changing on either one or both projects? >>>> >>>> thanks! >>>> Ohad >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com . >>>> To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com . >>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users . >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout . >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/foreman-users/GnrH3JabRSk/unsubscribe . >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com . >>>> To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com . >>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users . >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout . >>> >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com . >>> To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com . >>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users . >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout . >>> >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/foreman-users/GnrH3JabRSk/unsubscribe . >>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com . >>> To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com . >>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users . >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout . >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com . >> To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com . >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users . >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout . >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. >> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/foreman-users/GnrH3JabRSk/unsubscribe . >> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com . >> To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com . >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users . >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout . > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com . > To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com . > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout . > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/foreman-users/GnrH3JabRSk/unsubscribe . > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com . > To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com . > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .

Charlie_Derwent · October 24, 2015, 5:29pm

Hi everyone,

Agree with Lukas both 1 and 2 make sense, think the lines will blur as more
and more of Ansible's functionality is exploited. The kind of stuff I'd
like to see includes…

Deep linking with Ansible in both CM and Remote Execution components
of Foreman.
- Support for things like Ansible callbacks/Foreman Hooks, rich
  reporting and fact gathering
Foreman as rich "dynamic inventory" (ENC) for Ansible
- Hosts, Hostgroups, Smart Variables all passed through
Reporting/facts from multiple CM tools (eg Puppet/Ansible hybrid)
Cron-like functionality for remote execution

Really excited about the potential of this.

Charlie

···

On Monday, 19 October 2015 15:48:59 UTC+1, Lukas Zapletal wrote:

How do you see each option? which parts make sense (or no sense at all)?

I think both 1 and 2 make sense. Ansible is actually an orchestrator
with configuration mgmt capabilities. The more we can leverage from the
tool the better.

–
Later,
Lukas #lzap Zapletal

Chris_Mall · November 17, 2015, 5:25pm

Ansible is really cool but we love the salt integration with foreman better
especially with Reactors + Events.

···

On Saturday, October 24, 2015 at 6:29:01 PM UTC+1, Charlie Derwent wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > Agree with Lukas both 1 and 2 make sense, think the lines will blur as > more and more of Ansible's functionality is exploited. The kind of stuff > I'd like to see includes... > > - Deep linking with Ansible in both CM and Remote Execution components > of Foreman. > - Support for things like Ansible callbacks/Foreman Hooks, rich > reporting and fact gathering > - Foreman as rich "dynamic inventory" (ENC) for Ansible > - Hosts, Hostgroups, Smart Variables all passed through > - Reporting/facts from multiple CM tools (eg Puppet/Ansible hybrid) > - Cron-like functionality for remote execution > > > Really excited about the potential of this. > > Charlie > > > > On Monday, 19 October 2015 15:48:59 UTC+1, Lukas Zapletal wrote: > >> > How do you see each option? which parts make sense (or no sense at >> all)? >> >> I think both 1 and 2 make sense. Ansible is actually an orchestrator >> with configuration mgmt capabilities. The more we can leverage from the >> tool the better. >> >> -- >> Later, >> Lukas #lzap Zapletal >> >

Juan_Pablo_Lorier · February 25, 2016, 3:59pm

Chris,

You may start a new thread to discuss about salt. This is an ansible thread.
Regards

···

El martes, 17 de noviembre de 2015, 14:25:02 (UTC-3), Chris Mall escribió: > > Ansible is really cool but we love the salt integration with foreman > better especially with Reactors + Events. > > On Saturday, October 24, 2015 at 6:29:01 PM UTC+1, Charlie Derwent wrote: >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> Agree with Lukas both 1 and 2 make sense, think the lines will blur as >> more and more of Ansible's functionality is exploited. The kind of stuff >> I'd like to see includes... >> >> - Deep linking with Ansible in both CM and Remote Execution >> components of Foreman. >> - Support for things like Ansible callbacks/Foreman Hooks, rich >> reporting and fact gathering >> - Foreman as rich "dynamic inventory" (ENC) for Ansible >> - Hosts, Hostgroups, Smart Variables all passed through >> - Reporting/facts from multiple CM tools (eg Puppet/Ansible hybrid) >> - Cron-like functionality for remote execution >> >> >> Really excited about the potential of this. >> >> Charlie >> >> >> >> On Monday, 19 October 2015 15:48:59 UTC+1, Lukas Zapletal wrote: >> >>> > How do you see each option? which parts make sense (or no sense at >>> all)? >>> >>> I think both 1 and 2 make sense. Ansible is actually an orchestrator >>> with configuration mgmt capabilities. The more we can leverage from the >>> tool the better. >>> >>> -- >>> Later, >>> Lukas #lzap Zapletal >>> >>

dLobatog · February 25, 2016, 9:20pm

I guess people are aware of it these days - but we've started some
integration efforts under these projects:

Hope you enjoy it!

···

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Juan Pablo Lorier wrote: > Chris, > > You may start a new thread to discuss about salt. This is an ansible thread. > Regards > > > El martes, 17 de noviembre de 2015, 14:25:02 (UTC-3), Chris Mall escribió: >> >> Ansible is really cool but we love the salt integration with foreman >> better especially with Reactors + Events. >> >> On Saturday, October 24, 2015 at 6:29:01 PM UTC+1, Charlie Derwent wrote: >>> >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> Agree with Lukas both 1 and 2 make sense, think the lines will blur as >>> more and more of Ansible's functionality is exploited. The kind of stuff I'd >>> like to see includes... >>> >>> Deep linking with Ansible in both CM and Remote Execution components of >>> Foreman. >>> >>> Support for things like Ansible callbacks/Foreman Hooks, rich reporting >>> and fact gathering >>> >>> Foreman as rich "dynamic inventory" (ENC) for Ansible >>> >>> Hosts, Hostgroups, Smart Variables all passed through >>> >>> Reporting/facts from multiple CM tools (eg Puppet/Ansible hybrid) >>> Cron-like functionality for remote execution >>> >>> >>> Really excited about the potential of this. >>> >>> Charlie >>> >>> >>> >>> On Monday, 19 October 2015 15:48:59 UTC+1, Lukas Zapletal wrote: >>>> >>>> > How do you see each option? which parts make sense (or no sense at >>>> > all)? >>>> >>>> I think both 1 and 2 make sense. Ansible is actually an orchestrator >>>> with configuration mgmt capabilities. The more we can leverage from the >>>> tool the better. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Later, >>>> Lukas #lzap Zapletal > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Foreman users" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users. > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

–
Daniel Lobato

@elobatoss

GPG: http://keys.gnupg.net/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x7A92D6DD38D6DE30