Thread: [Shinken-devel] Give packs their own repo?
Status: Beta
Brought to you by:
naparuba
From: nap <nap...@gm...> - 2013-04-15 15:00:36
|
Hi, I was wondering if it can be a good thing to export current packs available in their own repos, and give a simple way to get them when we install Shinken. I think exporting them to N small repo can help to get more contribution on them, and even more variation/forks for special cases. It's a bit the idea like community.shinken-monitoring.org, but far more simple (it's just a repository for clone), and can push idea to others than they can also create a pack, it's very easy, and their don't need to clone 100K+ lines of the shinken repo for just add a new pack. I think we can focus on finish the current features for the next version, like modulations and architecture things, but this can be a good thing to work on for the 1.6 release. What do you think about this? Jean |
From: Jean-François B. <jea...@ve...> - 2013-04-15 16:04:16
|
Hello, I think that i t's a great thing to special packs which have the same targets (like windows ;-) ) but from particular host. Like windows shinken hosts and check_ping which is working well on linux but not on windows (i am talking about the shinken installation host). In this case, i could create a windows pack for shinken windows hosts Maybe with other systems (like smartphones or tablet), it will be great to create / upgrade packs from a common source and fork to specific values without changing the shinken core... And if a simple mechanism may permit a legacy during the user choice of packs (like windows new - only the check_command and one or two other specific commands - inherits windows generic - all the other windows standard commands), i will be great ;-) regards, Jean-François BUTKIEWICZ Consultant VEOSOFT (groupe VEONERGIE) ----- Mail original ----- De: "nap" <nap...@gm...> À: shi...@li... Envoyé: Lundi 15 Avril 2013 17:00:28 Objet: [Shinken-devel] Give packs their own repo? Hi, I was wondering if it can be a good thing to export current packs available in their own repos, and give a simple way to get them when we install Shinken. I think exporting them to N small repo can help to get more contribution on them, and even more variation/forks for special cases. It's a bit the idea like community.shinken-monitoring.org , but far more simple (it's just a repository for clone), and can push idea to others than they can also create a pack, it's very easy, and their don't need to clone 100K+ lines of the shinken repo for just add a new pack. I think we can focus on finish the current features for the next version, like modulations and architecture things, but this can be a good thing to work on for the 1.6 release. What do you think about this? Jean |
From: Frescha <fr...@un...> - 2013-04-15 18:10:31
|
Yeah, its really a good idea. I am also for it. Jean could you please found a organization for that. This could be a good place for packs. Am 15.04.2013 um 16:53 schrieb Jean-François BUTKIEWICZ <jea...@ve...>: > Hello, > > I think that it's a great thing to special packs which have the same targets (like windows ;-) ) but from particular host. Like windows shinken hosts and check_ping which is working well on linux but not on windows (i am talking about the shinken installation host). In this case, i could create a windows pack for shinken windows hosts > Maybe with other systems (like smartphones or tablet), it will be great to create / upgrade packs from a common source and fork to specific values without changing the shinken core... > > And if a simple mechanism may permit a legacy during the user choice of packs (like windows new - only the check_command and one or two other specific commands - inherits windows generic - all the other windows standard commands), i will be great ;-) > > regards, > Jean-François BUTKIEWICZ > Consultant VEOSOFT (groupe VEONERGIE) > > De: "nap" <nap...@gm...> > À: shi...@li... > Envoyé: Lundi 15 Avril 2013 17:00:28 > Objet: [Shinken-devel] Give packs their own repo? > > Hi, > I was wondering if it can be a good thing to export current packs available in their own repos, and give a simple way to get them when we install Shinken. > I think exporting them to N small repo can help to get more contribution on them, and even more variation/forks for special cases. It's a bit the idea like community.shinken-monitoring.org, but far more simple (it's just a repository for clone), and can push idea to others than they can also create a pack, it's very easy, and their don't need to clone 100K+ lines of the shinken repo for just add a new pack. > > I think we can focus on finish the current features for the next version, like modulations and architecture things, but this can be a good thing to work on for the 1.6 release. > What do you think about this? > > Jean > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Precog is a next-generation analytics platform capable of advanced > analytics on semi-structured data. The platform includes APIs for building > apps and a phenomenal toolset for data science. Developers can use > our toolset for easy data analysis & visualization. Get a free account! > http://www2.precog.com/precogplatform/slashdotnewsletter_______________________________________________ > Shinken-devel mailing list > Shi...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shinken-devel |
From: nap <nap...@gm...> - 2013-04-16 07:21:57
|
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Jean-François BUTKIEWICZ < jea...@ve...> wrote: > Hello, > > [...] > > And if a simple mechanism may permit a legacy during the user choice of > packs (like windows new - only the check_command and one or two other > specific commands - inherits windows generic - all the other windows > standard commands), i will be great ;-) > > > > regards, > Jean-François BUTKIEWICZ > Consultant VEOSOFT (groupe VEONERGIE) > > Hi, I think the repo thing will solve this problem without "previous version" feature. It's very easy to clone/pull a repository in guthub, and so someone can easily maintain its own version of a pack with small modifications (like a new check_ping command ;) ). This will be another repository, so another name, and so people will easily find which one to install. Jean |
From: nap <nap...@gm...> - 2013-04-16 07:23:32
|
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:57 PM, Frescha <fr...@un...> wrote: > Yeah, its really a good idea. I am also for it. > Jean could you please found a organization for that. This could be a good > place for packs. > > > Hi, Yes, the github https://github.com/shinken-monitoring org will be a great place for this :) Jean |
From: Hermann L. <Her...@iw...> - 2013-04-16 07:57:27
|
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 09:23:26AM +0200, nap wrote: > On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:57 PM, Frescha <fr...@un...> wrote: > > > Yeah, its really a good idea. I am also for it. > > Jean could you please found a organization for that. This could be a good > > place for packs. > > > > > > Hi, > > Yes, the github https://github.com/shinken-monitoring org will be a great > place for this :) +1 from here. Maintainers of distributions can then easily convert to separate packages and will be happy not to include unrunable stuff for foreign OS. Also dependency management will be easier, so less unneeded stuff will be installed. Just dreaming: wiki/docu also as repo, so a set of docu can also easily packed into a distribution... Thanks, greetings Hermann -- Netzwerkadministration/Zentrale Dienste, Interdiziplinaeres Zentrum fuer wissenschaftliches Rechnen der Universitaet Heidelberg IWR; INF 368; 69120 Heidelberg; Tel: (06221)54-8236 Fax: -5224 Email: Her...@iw... |
From: nap <nap...@gm...> - 2013-04-16 11:56:37
|
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Hermann Lauer < Her...@iw...> wrote: > [...] > > Just dreaming: wiki/docu also as repo, so a set of docu can > also easily packed into a distribution... > > Thanks, > greetings > Hermann In the last FR Linuxmag, there was an issue about gitit (http://gitit.net/) a git based wiki. The idea can be to have two source of data for the wiki : the web application, but also the same version but on the git, so always in sync with the release. But converting all the current wiki can be long, very long, after all, the current wiki is also flat file based, maybe we can find a way to always got a sync between the web version and the wiki one? (like a git repo on the website data directory, and sync it from a doc repository each minute?). If someone already try this, his experience can be interesting :) Jean |
From: nap <nap...@gm...> - 2013-04-17 09:42:05
|
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 1:56 PM, nap <nap...@gm...> wrote: > > [...] > > In the last FR Linuxmag, there was an issue about gitit (http://gitit.net/) > a git based wiki. The idea can be to have two source of data for the wiki : > the web application, but also the same version but on the git, so always in > sync with the release. But converting all the current wiki can be long, > very long, after all, the current wiki is also flat file based, maybe we > can find a way to always got a sync between the web version and the wiki > one? (like a git repo on the website data directory, and sync it from a doc > repository each minute?). > > If someone already try this, his experience can be interesting :) > > > Jean > Hi, Another idea on the same style : why not export modules to their own repo/pack? After all, there is no reason a core team module should be managed not the same way than a community one isn't it? Modules should be easy to code (they are) but also install (they are not until you know how a python module setup is done). I think we should put in the same level community and core team modules like for packs. So community members can have idea for new modules and won't be afraid about asking a place on the official repo (they maybe don't know I don't bite.. often). One thing about this is to have of course a easy module setup way (the installer know where the modules are, and it place the module in it, so it avoid the user to know how it work). One other thing about this is to allow modules to be kept between core upgrade (for community modules for examples). What do you think about this? Jean |