Talk:Comparison of open-source configuration management software

message: I've thrown some theory into the ISconf dicussion that might be better in a different section; feel free to rearrange, and please clarify my application to the mentioned tools (Bcfg2, Puppet, cfenging, ISconf) and to classify other tools. Thyrsus 21:59, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [untitled]

message: I wonder where we should put the discussion part of the article. Not in the talk page :
 The purpose of a Wikipedia talk page is to provide space for editors to discuss changes
 to its associated article or project page. Article talk pages should not be used by 
 editors as platforms for their personal views.
(Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines)
--Zethradon 15:09, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion of the article 

message: We need to come up with a way to list features that are not part of all of the tools' management models, without implying that having or not having those features is preferable. Until then, below is some work on package and service management.
Djbclark 04:01, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussing features that are not present in all tools 

message: Note: This means that the tool has built-in knowledge of how to deal with the package format.
                       	Bcfg2	Cfengine	Puppet
apt-get / dpkg  (deb)  	     	        	
emerge (portage)       	     	        	
epkg (encap)           	     	        	
pkg-get (blastwave)    	     	        	
pkgadd / pkg_add (sysv)	     	        	
port (macports)        	     	        	
rpm                    	     	        	
up2date                	     	        	
yum                    	     	        	
: This is very unix/linux centric; windows has its own world. Furthermore, how would you define 'support'? Do you mean 'can install/uninstall' an RPM, then anything that can issue rpm commands can do it. More interesting is whether the tool can manage the lifecycle, and include in any health checks the presence of rpm -managed files.
: More abstractly, you could view rpm and deb package manager tools as a form of CM software all of its own, if you push out custom RPMs that configure system state for your cluster. Its not very elegant, but it is possible. SteveLoughran 23:09, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Package support 

message: * Thread on config-mgmt mailing list —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Djbclark (talk • contribs) 23:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  See Also 

message: :Comparison of open source configuration management software → Comparison of open-source configuration management software — like Open-source software — Neustradamus (✉) 18:30, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Discussion moved to Talk:List of free and open source software packages#Requested move. Jafeluv (talk) 16:01, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 

message: even though Webmin (+Usermin +Virtualmin +Cloudmin) are not GPL, they're open source.
Why is webmin *not* included?
I started using it since 1998, and still use it to manage several servers!
173.21.108.129 (talk) 03:56, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  why not webmin 

message: Canonical's Juju should be added to this page.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.120.220.13 (talk) 16:06, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Juju? 

message: The cdist website has been cleaned up / added more content. Can you please check whether it's fine for integration now?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by NicoSchottelius (talk • contribs) 19:46, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  cdist 

message: I propose removing Arusha, or somehow noting the project is shut down. Slaurel (talk) 21:06, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arusha Project 

message: Rundeck is alive and well but the article about it redirects here, somewhat inappropriately since Rundeck isn't so much configuration management as it is task automation.  You can visit their website here: http://rundeck.org/   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.119.81.135 (talk) 23:16, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Also Recommend NOT having Rundeck's article redirect here 

message: Their website doesn't appear to have been updated since 2009.  5 years without a new release or even a new blog post signals that the project is pretty much dead.  Since it claims to support Windows, I wonder how well it can support Win7 or 8 both of which have appeared in the last 5 years.  
--129.119.81.135 (talk) 23:09, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recommend Removing SmartFrog 

message: They haven't had a release since 2010 (per their website), so this project looks to be dead as well.  
--129.119.81.135 (talk) 23:37, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Recommend Removing Radmind 

message: Configuration management software can be categorized by being agent based or not. Rex and Ansible (software) for example work without a special daemon, while Chef and Puppet appear to require this. The property could be called Agent, Daemon or Service. Agent is the term used in the Ansible (software) article. The Rex website also says "no agent required". --Athaba (talk) 09:22, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I added the property and a basic meaning, but I am sure there is someone with more experience, able to think of a better way to describe it. --Athaba (talk) 09:52, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

text: I inverted the column, because requiring the installation of an agent is an undesirable property for this kind of software --79.6.178.49 (talk) 12:28, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

text: Actually puppet works just fine without an agent: in fact that's how I've been running it for years. No puppet master, no daemon. Not sure where you got that idea that an agent is required. 114.112.193.102 (talk) 07:34, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  114.112.193.102, I've reverted your change to Puppet's "agent-less" state back to "no". You provided no source for this claim, and a casual reading of some config-management articles suggests that Puppet's use of agents sets it apart from some other products that specifically avoid agent use. If you have a reliably-published source that indicates that Puppet has an agent-less capability, please include it in your edit, or mention it here if you're not comfortable with citations and someone can add it. Thank you. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 15:55, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've reverted your reversion by setting it's agent-less state back to "yes". You can read about it here https://docs.puppetlabs.com/guides/install_puppet/pre_install.html#standalone-puppet . I'm not sure about citations so if anyone can insert I appreciate. 114.112.193.102 (talk) 17:41, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  You are incorrect. Puppet requires an agent. "agent-less" means nothing runs on the computer you are configuring. This is not the same as "Puppet stand alone" in which there is no puppet master. Not having a puppet master is not agent-less, it is agent-only. You could have the puppet agent on the system in a stand alone configuration, but not have it run on a schedule. This would be something like "agent on demand". Jgstew (talk) 19:48, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding an Agent Based property? 

message: I cannot find the source code for "Chef" and since this comparison is based on open source software "Chef" is not supposed to be in this list or it should be renamed in "comparison of configuration management software" and a new column should be introduced like "open source" yes/no.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.131.167.7 (talk) 15:03, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chef is not open source 

message: Due to the raising importance of different processor-architectures, an architecture-comparison is missing completely. This page could be a good resource to find out which configuration management software is supporting the ARM architecture.
91.64.111.235 (talk) 11:22, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Architecture-comparison missing 

message: Does the IBM-built open source package xCAT qualify as "configuration management" software? I think it does. However, I don't really have the expertise to make that call or describe it adequately. Anyone else feel like taking a stab? I think I'll mention this article over on Talk:xCAT as well. GeoGreg (talk) 20:49, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should xCAT be part of this article? 

message: What about Augeas?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.132.57.128 (talk) 00:24, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Augeas 

message: Chef is listed as a yes in the Agent-less column here.  I haven't been able to find a way to run Chef without Chef client.  Is this a mistake, or is it just an obscure or very new solution?  Jxn (talk) 22:08, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Agent-less Chef 

message: This article needs to use  and ==Notes== with , to separate the explanatory footnotes from source citations.  This article actually has very few of the latter, mostly to self-published marketing materials, and would benefit greatly from citations of independent sources, e.g. reviews and comparisons published in the professional computer science and systems administration press.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  05:55, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusing footnotes with references 

message: etcd is effectively a distributed database/key value store. It can and largely is used to store configuration, but every database out there would do that. Vagrant is a tool to set up virtual environments. Again it isn't there for configuration management. It does have a Vagrantfile, which kind of is a configuration file, but this itself allows to interface configuration management software (or plain shell). So it really shouldn't be in here. I don't know how NixOS is meant, but it appears to be a Linux Distribution that might contain packages for configuration management. A Linux distribution doesn't sound like configuration management either. In away, it's on the opposite side as you want to most likely manage its configuration. I will therefor remove all three of these.--Athaba (talk) 16:31, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  etcd and Vagrant aren't configuration management software 

message: Doesn't Docker belong on this list?  Is has the same function/purpose as Puppet/Chef etc., so is it not considered configuration management software? --64.211.224.254 (talk) 01:37, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Docker 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Comparison of open-source configuration management software. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://archive.is/20120716131832/http://trac.t7a.org/isconf/ticket/39 to http://trac.t7a.org/isconf/ticket/39
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100318061902/http://wiki.smartfrog.org/wiki/display/sf/Download to http://wiki.smartfrog.org/wiki/display/sf/Download
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:26, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hi Wikipedians
Terraform has a page on Wikipedia Terraform_(software) which has a link to this page.  So having Terraform included here would be very useful!
https://www.terraform.io
I'm don't have skills in figuring out the fields that Terraform would occupy in these tables, so ask if some kind person please update the lists to include this software.
 I am not an employee or investor of Terraform, just a user of web services, and appreciate your efforts for maintaining Wikipedia!! 
Rarscal (talk) 03:13, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Seconded! Nangaf (talk) 21:31, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thirded! Mazzystr (talk) 19:43, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please include Terraform in these lists!