[systemd-devel] Deployment/environment names [was: Re: [PATCH 2/4] Add ENVIRONMENT to hostnamed]

["Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"]

On 07/09/2014 01:05 AM, josh at joshtriplett.org wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 10:45:11PM +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>> >
>> >On 07/08/2014 10:45 PM, Josh Triplett wrote:
>>> > >[Responding to this version because the latest thread hasn't appeared in
>>> > >the mbox archives yet.  The comments apply equally well to the latest
>>> > >version, "Add DEPLOYMENT to hostnamectl".]
>>> > >
>>> > >On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 12:38:50AM +0000, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
>>>> > >>+static bool valid_environment(const char *environment) {
>>>> > >>+
>>>> > >>+        assert(environment);
>>>> > >>+
>>>> > >>+        return nulstr_contains(
>>>> > >>+                        "development\0"
>>>> > >>+                        "staging\0"
>>>> > >>+                        "production\0",
>>>> > >>+                        environment);
>>>> > >>+}
>>> > >Can we please*not*  attempt to limit or "standardize" this particular
>>> > >set of machine roles?  As already demonstrated in the previous thread,
>>> > >people have all sorts of staged deployment strategies.  Furthermore,
>>> > >the concept of a machine role shouldn't be limited to service deployment
>>> > >strategies.
>>> > >
>> >
>> >Roles != the environment they run in.
> I'm not trying to bikeshed over the naming of the variable itself.  I'm
> arguing that standardizing this particular bit of metadata won't work
> well when so many different deployment strategies exist.  Thus, rather
> than having a fixed set of keywords, I'd propose simply saying "this
> contains keywords", and leaving the specific keywords up to the admin.
> If you attempt to standardize production/development/staging, you'll
> either end up with a model that only works for a small subset of
> deployments, or you'll end up adding twelve more keywords, at which
> point you might as well have just said "use whatever keyword you like".

The 4 tier covers the majority of the models since more or less the 
entire internet recommend three tier model including M$ [1]
Anyone wanting to extend that further can do so using the 
"PRETTY_HOSTNAME="

This patch is very specific to deployment environment and to solve a 
very specific long standing problem and to achieve that we need to a 
standardize, if we dont we can just as well drop this patch since in the 
long run we cannot introduce something like "ConditionDeployment=" like 
David mentioned and it kinda defeat's my purpose working in this in the 
firsplace...

1. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-US/library/cc982570%28v=bts.10%29.aspx
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/attachments/20140709/c3688085/attachment.html>