New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Expand gitfs for pillar #3745
Comments
Yes, I decided to wait on this when I concluded that git-python was not the right way to go. As for pillar, this should be done in an external pillar module once we get the backend moved to libgit2. |
Just a thought for when this gets going, but it'd be beneficial at times to have the fileserver and pillar in the same git repo and the same branch, only in subdirectories. Would it possible to offer somewhat richer ways select where the data is on the remote, besides just url? Also specify branch/tag and path? |
I agree with @cellofellow I may be missing the philosophy behind the separation, but would it be make sense to move to something like this?: /srv/salt/state |
From a gitfs perspective, this is viable, the thing to keep in mind is just how different pillar is from the file server, pillar generates data and the file server serves files, just because they use the same logical construction for managing sls files does not mean that they are the same. |
Personally, I would never put the pillar and the state tree in the same repo. I want to control access to the pillar data while openly sharing the state tree. |
@jesusaurus says it very well, pillar is meant to be isolated. |
"Yes, I decided to wait on this when I concluded that git-python was not the right way to go." Have you considered dulwich: https://github.com/jelmer/dulwich ? |
Hrm, haven't seen that one, I'll have to look into it, see how mature it is. |
What wrong with git-python (if it https://github.com/gitpython-developers/GitPython ) |
That is what we are using right now. I need to powwow with @thatch45 to figure out exactly why we don't like GitPython -- I've never gotten around to asking him. =P |
I realize this issue is a bit more general, but if you were looking for pillar through git it is now merged #5732 |
I think that it would be safe to cherry-pick this feature into 0.16.0 before the final release @basepi |
Done. |
Should we close this issue, as we can now use git for pillar? Or do we still want to extend the existing gitfs as well? |
yep |
@avnik @basepi git-python has some limitations that the openstack developers have run into. They all seem to boil down an assumption that the local git tree is only being used by git-python. As soon as you start running git commands outside of git-python on the local repo, you will end up in some wonky states. To avoid this, you pretty much have to run "git-update-index" regularly (not something people usually do). |
Yes, so far so good just because these git repos are not called outside of git-python. But still, I look forward to switching to a libgit2 system when those libs are ready! |
@thatch45 I don't think this issued should be closed just yet. I really like the work being done with both the gitfs backend and the git ext_pillar, but I want to see the two consolidated a bit more, and more importantly I think there should be more consistency in their configuration. Unfortunately, with the current codebase ext_pillar and fileserver_backend work in rather different ways, which makes it difficult to consolidate the heavy git lifting into a module e.g. salt.utils.gitfs. |
@jesusaurus Can you open a new issue for these consolidation tasks? This issue is technically resolved, as there's a git backend for pillar. I think opening a new issue will help us to see what needs to be done at a glance. |
I really like gitfs, and would like to see it expanded. For starters, it should be documented; but more importantly I would also like to be able to back pillar data with gitfs. I see this restructuring the config format. Maybe something like:
Thoughts?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: