Re: CfEngine vs bash scripts

To: Dominik George <natureshadow@debian.org>
Cc: debian-edu@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: CfEngine vs bash scripts
From: Dashamir Hoxha <dashohoxha@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 13 May 2023 21:58:13 +0200
Message-id: <[🔎] CAMucfLx9td5hKPBA2GpO0-oE1YYEcQ2q_e1wKy+o3N2vqJTQTA@mail.gmail.com>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 86DC1610-9283-49EF-B3ED-2E04BEA79C2B@debian.org>
References: <[🔎] CAMucfLybfFGSWBSieAMUGbkyrJ==bdG1QDR5j-7fZMDyMaM6WA@mail.gmail.com> <[🔎] 86DC1610-9283-49EF-B3ED-2E04BEA79C2B@debian.org>

On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 9:07 AM Dominik George <natureshadow@debian.org> wrote:

That said, both Mike and me are making efforts to introduce FAI to parts of Debian Edu, but not for everything.

This seems interesting. I hope there will be some instructions on how to use it.

Dashamir

Reply to:

References:
- CfEngine vs bash scripts
  - From: Dashamir Hoxha <dashohoxha@gmail.com>
- Re: CfEngine vs bash scripts
  - From: Dominik George <natureshadow@debian.org>

Prev by Date: Re: Thic client (X2Go) workaround
Next by Date: Re: CfEngine vs bash scripts
Previous by thread: Re: CfEngine vs bash scripts
Next by thread: Re: CfEngine vs bash scripts
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread