This issue has the purpose of tracking progress for improving the way the puppet-python module manage packages.
Issues we want to solve
In these example, we assume a control-repo with a profile::python class that wraps the puppet-python module with site-specific config:
class profile::python {
class { 'python':
ensure => present,
# ...
}
}
System packages with dependencies on python-foo
The syslog-ng-mod-python package depend on python-venv. When this package is added to the catalog, puppet will install syslog-ng-mod-python, which will install python-venv as a dependency. On next run, python-venv is removed (because the python class default to ensure this package is absent) and syslog-ng-mod-python which depend on it is also removed.
To workaround this issue, we can skip management of the python-venv in the python module with:
class profile::python {
class { 'python':
# ...
manage_venv_package => false, # python-venv is a dependency of syslog-ng-mod-python
}
}
If another node need to have the venv package installed, we have a few solutions:
Add a parameter to the profile::python and use Hiera to set it to a custom value on the nodes that must have different behavior;
Duplicate and adjust the profile::python class (e.g. profile::python_with_venv) and include one or the other of these two conflicting profiles, leading to some duplication;
Manage the python-venv package in the profile that need it, duplicating what the puppet-python module is supposed to manage.
None of these solutions is great.
Puppet modules needing a specific component
The puppet-puppetboard module rely on the puppet-python module. When installing from a venv, it include this code in the catalog:
class { 'python':
version => $python_version,
dev => 'present',
venv => 'present',
}
This clash with the above profile::python. To cope with this, the module provide a manage_virtualenv parameter to skips this fragment and allow the user to handle this themself, with the same solutions and same drawbacks as seen in the previous example.
How puppetlabs-apache handle a similar issue
Apache has a lot of different modules, but each one is managed in a different class allowing to do some composition of the dependencies from another puppet module, e.g.:
class taiga::vhost {
include apache
include apache::mod::passenger
# ...
}
For the end-user include taiga::vhost will do the right thing, and if they want to customize the apache::mod::passenger parameters, they can do this in their code:
class profile::taiga {
class { 'apache::mod::passenger':
# ... this would be in a passenger specific profile
}
class { 'taiga::vhost':
# ...
}
}
Roadmap
After this long context, I propose to rework the module package management to match what is done by puppetlabs-apache, make it easier to manage dependencies in consumer modules and avoid conflicts.
This is a three step process:
[x] Allow to opt-out of management of python-dev (enhancement) #669 [Released in v7.1.0];
[ ] Change defaults for packages which are ensured absent by default: switch them to installed but do not manage them by default (backwards-incompatible).
This issue has the purpose of tracking progress for improving the way the puppet-python module manage packages.
Issues we want to solve
In these example, we assume a control-repo with a
profile::python
class that wraps the puppet-python module with site-specific config:System packages with dependencies on
python-foo
The
syslog-ng-mod-python
package depend onpython-venv
. When this package is added to the catalog, puppet will installsyslog-ng-mod-python
, which will installpython-venv
as a dependency. On next run,python-venv
is removed (because the python class default to ensure this package is absent) andsyslog-ng-mod-python
which depend on it is also removed.To workaround this issue, we can skip management of the
python-venv
in the python module with:If another node need to have the venv package installed, we have a few solutions:
profile::python
and use Hiera to set it to a custom value on the nodes that must have different behavior;profile::python
class (e.g.profile::python_with_venv
) and include one or the other of these two conflicting profiles, leading to some duplication;python-venv
package in the profile that need it, duplicating what the puppet-python module is supposed to manage.None of these solutions is great.
Puppet modules needing a specific component
The puppet-puppetboard module rely on the puppet-python module. When installing from a venv, it include this code in the catalog:
This clash with the above
profile::python
. To cope with this, the module provide amanage_virtualenv
parameter to skips this fragment and allow the user to handle this themself, with the same solutions and same drawbacks as seen in the previous example.How puppetlabs-apache handle a similar issue
Apache has a lot of different modules, but each one is managed in a different class allowing to do some composition of the dependencies from another puppet module, e.g.:
For the end-user
include taiga::vhost
will do the right thing, and if they want to customize theapache::mod::passenger
parameters, they can do this in their code:Roadmap
After this long context, I propose to rework the module package management to match what is done by puppetlabs-apache, make it easier to manage dependencies in consumer modules and avoid conflicts.
This is a three step process:
python-dev
(enhancement) #669 [Released in v7.1.0];