I’ve never used Ansible, can someone familiar with it tell us if this person is a cornerstone of the ecosystem or something?
I’ve never used Ansible, can someone familiar with it tell us if this person is a cornerstone of the ecosystem or something?
After 2020, I slowed introducing CentOS examples, and converted all my CentOS usage to Rocky Linux.
At this point, I will not be creating any more examples building on RHEL-like OSes, but I might still maintain some of my examples on Rocky Linux, we'll see.
They've done decently to lock down the sort of places that tell you what's being used, not chosen.
I say this with pain on my face, I don't want it going this way
https://www.jeffgeerling.com/blog/2022/external-graphics-car...
By doing this, there's certainty that a lot of what's written will work just fine on RHEL. It's a huge Python library with the express purpose of abstracting away annoying OS quirks
CentOS Stream <-> RHEL is basically point releases. You're generally well past this stage by using Ansible.
At most you want to care about the OS family, treating the derivatives as part -- Debian, Red Hat, etc. Focusing mostly on binary/config file path quirks
There may be certain traits about RHEL users that will bring some issues
eg: more likely actually using SELinux, have forgotten to tend to their subscriptions, or are aiming for more strict compliance
I know of him through his Ansible 'roles'. Definitely one of the few people I could name in the space. Note: roles are reusable sets of config tasks
Regarding the stance, I'm a little bewildered.
Some background on Ansible: the entire point of it is to reduce how much you care about the target OS... and he's supporting very-similar derivatives.
What little effort is required, will largely be there. Very rarely, dare I say never, do you care about point releases. Something silly is afoot if so.
Being selective with your modules deals with a considerable part the abstraction. For example, use 'package' instead of apt/dnf/something specific.
I write/test on Fedora, deploy to Ubuntu, and have been migrating to RHEL -- with no serious effort. Some dictionaries to hold different binary/config file paths.
Anyway, this is all to say - I see this as somewhat performative, but I don't disagree with it either.
I don't believe much will happen in the end. Good, bad, or otherwise.
The roles very likely will work in 'unsupported' land. Yet, the path IBM is taking with Red Hat is clear (while annoying)... and probably not changing
Calling it now, the majority of the incompatibility will be:
- subscription-manager (which can/should be done before roles you get from others)
- FIPS (a niche, where I would fully support the response being a support contract request)
Add a dash of irony (maybe?) because he's still supporting Red Hat indirectly by working with/on Ansible and close-enough environments.