[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Automatic deployment and maintenance



Andrew Sackville-West a écrit :
On Mon, Jul 16, 2007 at 04:14:22AM +0200, Sebastien JUST wrote:
Thanks for your answers.

Andrew Sackville-West a écrit :

again pushing is probably not good. But you could set up something to
automate the pulling so that when you've tested updates on your
testing machines, you can set a flag somewhere to force the pulling
machines to automatically upgrade. cron-apt and others can do
automated, unattended upgrades, but you'd want to configure it so that
it only did so in certain circumstances. Maybe a tiered approach to
your own apt repositories. PUll upgrades into the first tier and
deploy on test machines. WHen you're satisfied, push those upgrades
into the next tier where all your machines can pull them automatically.
yes exactly

- show diffs between local installed packages and repositories
again, apt can do this easily, depending on what you need. So, nothing real helpful I know, but maybe there's some helpful ideas
in there.
Anyway, any interested people in such a tool, maybe we can create a small workgroup ?


sorry, not me. But, there are existing tools for providing your own
apt repository and it should be fairly straightforward to script some
system to handle it in two tiers. I know that doesn't handle all the
gui stuff, but its at least part of the problem. Also, you mentioned,
and I snipped, that you'd like to server to control whether a machine
downloads and installs or not and I think the two tiered approach is
the way to handle it. Then you don't have to issue instructions to
machines as to whether they upgrade or not. The machines automatically
chekc your repository nightly (or whenever) and install whatever is
there. You control what is there.
sorry that I've not got more, but there it is.

A

Like you pointed It, there are existing tools that do most of the low level work, and it would definitivly a bad idea not to use them .

I also agree that you can't push directly to the clients, first because you can't be sure of a permanent connection. So It seems necessary to store required changes on the server, waiting for the client to connect, agree the changes, and validate that the operation had been done.

For the workgroup, discussing is already a good start !

Sebastien



Reply to: