[Labs-l] List of packages that are supported by tool labs

[Petr Bena]

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Ryan Lane <rlane at wikimedia.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 12:42 AM, Petr Bena <benapetr at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Not really, this give me a list of packages that are installed by all
>> classes recursively, but what if someone decide to remove some package
>> from some class that the tool labs classes are inherited from?
>>
>> I think that only logical way of maintaining such a list would be to
>> make it by hand and ensure that all packages on such a list are
>> somewhere included (in some class).
>>
>
> I'm sorry, but when you suggest doing anything by hand, ever, you're
> suggesting the wrong thing. If a package gets removed and it was needed,
> then it should have been listed in the puppet config. The goal of
> configuration management is to never, ever do anything manually that affects
> the state of the system.
>

But what if someone removes something from puppet? Not directly from a
class of tool labs but some other class that tool labs inherits. How
are people supposed to know that this package was actually never
"supported" by tool labs, but was installed as dependency of different
class, which maintainer of decided it's no longer needed.

It wouldn't be the first time when list of default packages that are
installed on every instance by default was shortened. I remember
original instances on labs, time ago, had much more packages than
newly created instances.

>>
>> But I don't really think that anybody cares, hence almost no responses
>> to this... Tool labs appear to me to be pretty much random when it
>> comes to sw support... somewhere some stuff works, somewhere it
>> doesn't...
>>
>
> When you say somewhere it works and somewhere it doesn't, do you mean exec
> nodes? If so, who's been running apt-get install manually on any of them? If
> the instances were configured with puppet and nothing manual was ever
> installed they should all look 100% the same. If a manual action was ever
> taken on any of them, then that someone is doing ops poorly.
>

They don't look the same, even if they are maintained by puppet. It's
just that they use different images, so older instances have different
sw, have a look there:

http://tools.wmflabs.org/admin/packages

> - Ryan
>
> _______________________________________________
> Labs-l mailing list
> Labs-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/labs-l
>