FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Ubuntu > Ubuntu Server Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 06-04-2008, 01:00 AM
"Nicolas Valcarcel"
 
Default RFC: Centrilized managment console

I have been working on the blueprint of a centralized managment console [1]*using some of the ideas that some people gave me at UDS, i'm a little stuck (and still fighting with the timezone changes)*on some technical details (i.e. how need meta data be defined) i will really apreciate if you can give a look at the specification and mail me with your opinions and ideas.

*
Nick: you talk me about some interesting ideas i'm missing, can you please take a review on this.
*
1. https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/ubuntu-centralized-services-administrator
--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 06-04-2008, 01:55 AM
"Jonathan Jesse"
 
Default RFC: Centrilized managment console

On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 9:00 PM, Nicolas Valcarcel <nvalcarcel@ubuntu.com> wrote:


I have been working on the blueprint of a centralized managment console [1]*using some of the ideas that some people gave me at UDS, i'm a little stuck (and still fighting with the timezone changes)*on some technical details (i.e. how need meta data be defined) i will really apreciate if you can give a look at the specification and mail me with your opinions and ideas.

*
Nick: you talk me about some interesting ideas i'm missing, can you please take a review on this.
*
1. https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/ubuntu-centralized-services-administrator

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server

More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam


Nicholas,
*
I am very excited to see a project like this get started.* I think we need to come up with a way of summarizng the different emails that have come through Ubuntu Server (see the GUI on a Server) plus the most recent thread as well.* Let me know how I can help.

*
Jonathan
--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 06-04-2008, 11:24 AM
Dan Shearer
 
Default RFC: Centrilized managment console

On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 08:00:31PM -0500, Nicolas Valcarcel wrote:
> I have been working on the blueprint of a centralized managment console
:
> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/ubuntu-centralized-services-administrator

I'm not sure how best to contribute, so I'll start with a few comments
here first.

Rationale
---------

I wonder if the Rationale section is maybe looking at the right things
from the wrong starting point. To me the deeper analysis is:

Ubuntu Server has no awareness of itself as a product.

Yast, webmin and the rest don't address this either. Personally I'd be
delighted to stick with existing Ubuntu Server tools for managing
services (thanks, Debian, upstreams!) and just overlay a higher order of
understanding and control. Which, at our later option, we can make as
GUI as we like, or as is required.

There's a subtle point here that was only hinted at before, I can't
remember who made it. The good thing a lot of us see in the Microsoft
admin tools is that they have this higher order of understanding to some
degree. Not so much just that there is a GUI. And that is where I think
some of the debate on this list has been like ships passing in the
night, people not realising that the others are talking about different
things. I despite a mandatory GUI as much as the next Unix person. But I
recognise value in a network-centric management view, such as delivered
nicely by some GUI tools.

Outline Sketch Implementation
-----------------------------

Following is a sketch of a commandline tool ubuntu-server-admin.py that,
if it existed, would give me confidence that a useful admin tool could
be built on top of it. My tool would be interacting with existing Linux
and Debian management facilities, and would use a database. I have a
clear idea for how the database would work but that's detail.

u-s-admin --report --overview returns an XML summary file that says:
name = X, otherwise known as Z
services I'm running that matter to users are A,B,C
the locations of my vital data are D, E, F
the network services I depend on are G, H I
the network servers I depend on are J, K, L
the machines to which I log messages are M and N
the machines monitoring me are O and P

(where I say 'machine' above it is likely 'CNAME' in reality to avoid
hard coding)

u-s-admin --report --depend-network-services would return:
DNS server details, and their current status
KDC server details and status
:

u-s-admin --report --depend-network-servers would return:
Server J: rsync for backup, on port X; and current status
Server K: SQL server for webapp we're running; and current status
Server L: web proxy for accellerator for Apache we're running; and current status

Given this level of awareness, next we need to configure these things.
The fact of this configuration would not be kept in the database, the
database would only be for the higher-level understanding. This would be
making calls to debconf or apachectl or whatever makes sense, and these
tools just manage state the same way they always did.

--
Dan Shearer
dan@shearer.org

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 06-04-2008, 11:08 PM
"Nicolas Valcarcel"
 
Default RFC: Centrilized managment console

Dan: that's the exact contribution i was expecting

The most tricky part is to define a structure of meta data for this (i'm thinking in metadata as the one defined in ufw's specification [1] a sort of plain text format or xml file to use it as part of the parser (maybe use a "dynamic" parser that defines his parameter with those files) but i'm kind of stuck on that, i'm out of ideas for now and we will reach the bluprint freeze tomorrow, so i need some help on this.


1. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuFirewall#head-420cfccabaafd264947d8b97cfa03926089a07e7


On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 6:24 AM, Dan Shearer <dan@shearer.org> wrote:

On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 08:00:31PM -0500, Nicolas Valcarcel wrote:

> I have been working on the blueprint of a centralized managment console

* :

> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/ubuntu-centralized-services-administrator




I'm not sure how best to contribute, so I'll start with a few comments

here first.



Rationale

---------



I wonder if the Rationale section is maybe looking at the right things

from the wrong starting point. *To me the deeper analysis is:



* *Ubuntu Server has no awareness of itself as a product.



Yast, webmin and the rest don't address this either. *Personally I'd be

delighted to stick with existing Ubuntu Server tools for managing

services (thanks, Debian, upstreams!) and just overlay a higher order of

understanding and control. Which, at our later option, we can make as

GUI as we like, or as is required.



There's a subtle point here that was only hinted at before, I can't

remember who made it. The good thing a lot of us see in the Microsoft

admin tools is that they have this higher order of understanding to some

degree. Not so much just that there is a GUI. And that is where I think

some of the debate on this list has been like ships passing in the

night, people not realising that the others are talking about different

things. I despite a mandatory GUI as much as the next Unix person. But I

recognise value in a network-centric management view, such as delivered

nicely by some GUI tools.



Outline Sketch Implementation

-----------------------------



Following is a sketch of a commandline tool ubuntu-server-admin.py that,

if it existed, would give me confidence that a useful admin tool could

be built on top of it. My tool would be interacting with existing Linux

and Debian management facilities, and would use a database. I have a

clear idea for how the database would work but that's detail.



u-s-admin --report --overview returns an XML summary file that says:

* name = X, otherwise known as Z

* services I'm running that matter to users are A,B,C

* the locations of my vital data are D, E, F

* the network services I depend on are G, H I

* the network servers I depend on are J, K, L

* the machines to which I log messages are M and N

* the machines monitoring me are O and P



(where I say 'machine' above it is likely 'CNAME' in reality to avoid

hard coding)



u-s-admin --report --depend-network-services would return:

* DNS server details, and their current status

* KDC server details and status

* *:



u-s-admin --report --depend-network-servers would return:

* Server J: rsync for backup, on port X; and current status

* Server K: SQL server for webapp we're running; and current status

* Server L: web proxy for accellerator for Apache we're running; and current status



Given this level of awareness, next we need to configure these things.

The fact of this configuration would not be kept in the database, the

database would only be for the higher-level understanding. This would be

making calls to debconf or apachectl or whatever makes sense, and these

tools just manage state the same way they always did.



--

Dan Shearer

dan@shearer.org



--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 06-05-2008, 01:04 AM
"Nicolas Valcarcel"
 
Default RFC: Centrilized managment console

Dan: that's the exact contribution i was expecting

The most
tricky part is to define a structure of meta data for this (i'm
thinking in metadata as the one defined in ufw's specification [1] a
sort of plain text format or xml file to use it as part of the parser
(maybe use a "dynamic" parser that defines his parameter with those
files) but i'm kind of stuck on that, i'm out of ideas for now and we
will reach the bluprint freeze tomorrow, so i need some help on this.


1. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuFirewall#head-420cfccabaafd264947d8b97cfa03926089a07e7


On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 6:24 AM, Dan Shearer <dan@shearer.org> wrote:

On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 08:00:31PM -0500, Nicolas Valcarcel wrote:

> I have been working on the blueprint of a centralized managment console

* :

> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/ubuntu-centralized-services-administrator




I'm not sure how best to contribute, so I'll start with a few comments

here first.



Rationale

---------



I wonder if the Rationale section is maybe looking at the right things

from the wrong starting point. *To me the deeper analysis is:



* *Ubuntu Server has no awareness of itself as a product.



Yast, webmin and the rest don't address this either. *Personally I'd be

delighted to stick with existing Ubuntu Server tools for managing

services (thanks, Debian, upstreams!) and just overlay a higher order of

understanding and control. Which, at our later option, we can make as

GUI as we like, or as is required.



There's a subtle point here that was only hinted at before, I can't

remember who made it. The good thing a lot of us see in the Microsoft

admin tools is that they have this higher order of understanding to some

degree. Not so much just that there is a GUI. And that is where I think

some of the debate on this list has been like ships passing in the

night, people not realising that the others are talking about different

things. I despite a mandatory GUI as much as the next Unix person. But I

recognise value in a network-centric management view, such as delivered

nicely by some GUI tools.



Outline Sketch Implementation

-----------------------------



Following is a sketch of a commandline tool ubuntu-server-admin.py that,

if it existed, would give me confidence that a useful admin tool could

be built on top of it. My tool would be interacting with existing Linux

and Debian management facilities, and would use a database. I have a

clear idea for how the database would work but that's detail.



u-s-admin --report --overview returns an XML summary file that says:

* name = X, otherwise known as Z

* services I'm running that matter to users are A,B,C

* the locations of my vital data are D, E, F

* the network services I depend on are G, H I

* the network servers I depend on are J, K, L

* the machines to which I log messages are M and N

* the machines monitoring me are O and P



(where I say 'machine' above it is likely 'CNAME' in reality to avoid

hard coding)



u-s-admin --report --depend-network-services would return:

* DNS server details, and their current status

* KDC server details and status

* *:



u-s-admin --report --depend-network-servers would return:

* Server J: rsync for backup, on port X; and current status

* Server K: SQL server for webapp we're running; and current status

* Server L: web proxy for accellerator for Apache we're running; and current status



Given this level of awareness, next we need to configure these things.

The fact of this configuration would not be kept in the database, the

database would only be for the higher-level understanding. This would be

making calls to debconf or apachectl or whatever makes sense, and these

tools just manage state the same way they always did.



--

Dan Shearer

dan@shearer.org



--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 06-05-2008, 01:10 AM
"Jonathan Jesse"
 
Default RFC: Centrilized managment console

On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 7:24 AM, Dan Shearer <dan@shearer.org> wrote:


On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 08:00:31PM -0500, Nicolas Valcarcel wrote:
> I have been working on the blueprint of a centralized managment console
* :

> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/ubuntu-centralized-services-administrator


I'm not sure how best to contribute, so I'll start with a few comments
here first.

Rationale
---------

I wonder if the Rationale section is maybe looking at the right things
from the wrong starting point. *To me the deeper analysis is:


* *Ubuntu Server has no awareness of itself as a product.

Yast, webmin and the rest don't address this either. *Personally I'd be
delighted to stick with existing Ubuntu Server tools for managing

services (thanks, Debian, upstreams!) and just overlay a higher order of
understanding and control. Which, at our later option, we can make as
GUI as we like, or as is required.

There's a subtle point here that was only hinted at before, I can't

remember who made it. The good thing a lot of us see in the Microsoft
admin tools is that they have this higher order of understanding to some
degree. Not so much just that there is a GUI. And that is where I think

some of the debate on this list has been like ships passing in the
night, people not realising that the others are talking about different
things. I despite a mandatory GUI as much as the next Unix person. But I

recognise value in a network-centric management view, such as delivered
nicely by some GUI tools.

Outline Sketch Implementation
-----------------------------

Following is a sketch of a commandline tool ubuntu-server-admin.py that,

if it existed, would give me confidence that a useful admin tool could
be built on top of it. My tool would be interacting with existing Linux
and Debian management facilities, and would use a database. I have a

clear idea for how the database would work but that's detail.

u-s-admin --report --overview returns an XML summary file that says:
* name = X, otherwise known as Z
* services I'm running that matter to users are A,B,C

* the locations of my vital data are D, E, F
* the network services I depend on are G, H I
* the network servers I depend on are J, K, L
* the machines to which I log messages are M and N
* the machines monitoring me are O and P


(where I say 'machine' above it is likely 'CNAME' in reality to avoid
hard coding)

u-s-admin --report --depend-network-services would return:
* DNS server details, and their current status

* KDC server details and status
* *:

u-s-admin --report --depend-network-servers would return:
* Server J: rsync for backup, on port X; and current status
* Server K: SQL server for webapp we're running; and current status

* Server L: web proxy for accellerator for Apache we're running; and current status

Given this level of awareness, next we need to configure these things.
The fact of this configuration would not be kept in the database, the

database would only be for the higher-level understanding. This would be
making calls to debconf or apachectl or whatever makes sense, and these
tools just manage state the same way they always did.

--
Dan Shearer

dan@shearer.org

--



ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server

More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam


Dan,
*
I agree that I don't want to see a nice GUI environment, but I do want to be able policies against a group of computers that will report information back to me.
*
So what happens after I do a u-s-admin -report?* How does the data get displayed?* How can i report against u-s-admin?* I would like a list of computers that are my DNS servers in my environment or a list of my SQL servers in the environment?

*
XML is great that once you define that information it can be transmitted/delt with however you want to.
*
Let me think more on this
--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 06-05-2008, 01:22 AM
"Jonathan Jesse"
 
Default RFC: Centrilized managment console

On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 9:10 PM, Jonathan Jesse <jjesse@gmail.com> wrote:







On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 7:24 AM, Dan Shearer <dan@shearer.org> wrote:


On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 08:00:31PM -0500, Nicolas Valcarcel wrote:
> I have been working on the blueprint of a centralized managment console
* :

> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/ubuntu-centralized-services-administrator


I'm not sure how best to contribute, so I'll start with a few comments
here first.

Rationale
---------

I wonder if the Rationale section is maybe looking at the right things
from the wrong starting point. *To me the deeper analysis is:


* *Ubuntu Server has no awareness of itself as a product.

Yast, webmin and the rest don't address this either. *Personally I'd be
delighted to stick with existing Ubuntu Server tools for managing

services (thanks, Debian, upstreams!) and just overlay a higher order of
understanding and control. Which, at our later option, we can make as
GUI as we like, or as is required.

There's a subtle point here that was only hinted at before, I can't

remember who made it. The good thing a lot of us see in the Microsoft
admin tools is that they have this higher order of understanding to some
degree. Not so much just that there is a GUI. And that is where I think

some of the debate on this list has been like ships passing in the
night, people not realising that the others are talking about different
things. I despite a mandatory GUI as much as the next Unix person. But I

recognise value in a network-centric management view, such as delivered
nicely by some GUI tools.

Outline Sketch Implementation
-----------------------------

Following is a sketch of a commandline tool ubuntu-server-admin.py that,

if it existed, would give me confidence that a useful admin tool could
be built on top of it. My tool would be interacting with existing Linux
and Debian management facilities, and would use a database. I have a

clear idea for how the database would work but that's detail.

u-s-admin --report --overview returns an XML summary file that says:
* name = X, otherwise known as Z
* services I'm running that matter to users are A,B,C

* the locations of my vital data are D, E, F
* the network services I depend on are G, H I
* the network servers I depend on are J, K, L
* the machines to which I log messages are M and N
* the machines monitoring me are O and P


(where I say 'machine' above it is likely 'CNAME' in reality to avoid
hard coding)

u-s-admin --report --depend-network-services would return:
* DNS server details, and their current status

* KDC server details and status
* *:

u-s-admin --report --depend-network-servers would return:
* Server J: rsync for backup, on port X; and current status
* Server K: SQL server for webapp we're running; and current status

* Server L: web proxy for accellerator for Apache we're running; and current status

Given this level of awareness, next we need to configure these things.
The fact of this configuration would not be kept in the database, the

database would only be for the higher-level understanding. This would be
making calls to debconf or apachectl or whatever makes sense, and these
tools just manage state the same way they always did.

--
Dan Shearer

dan@shearer.org

--



ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server

More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam


Dan,
*
I agree that I don't want to see a nice GUI environment, but I do want to be able policies against a group of computers that will report information back to me.
*
So what happens after I do a u-s-admin -report?* How does the data get displayed?* How can i report against u-s-admin?* I would like a list of computers that are my DNS servers in my environment or a list of my SQL servers in the environment?

*
XML is great that once you define that information it can be transmitted/delt with however you want to.
*
Let me think more on this
*
Replying to my own post:
*
I think we should mandate a GUI environment.* Something that can be schedued to run over and over again
Nicolas,
Just wonder if this is something that should be targeted to Intrepid +1?* That way we can run it and test it for intrepid and move forward as we work towards the next ZLTS

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 06-05-2008, 01:28 AM
Neal McBurnett
 
Default RFC: Centrilized managment console

Re:
https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/ubuntu-centralized-services-administrator

First, thanks! I think something along the lines of a simplified
admin for servers is critically important for Ubuntu to deliver on its
mission. And I do think that due to the huge demand, we need a GUI
option, whether or not I use it....

And I also suffer from what I think many on the team do - as a
Unix/Linux hacker for over 30 years, I'm used to the command line and
don't want some simplified tool to muck things up for me - I'm not one
of the target users, and find it hard to find time to get myself in
that mindset and work on this stuff.

But like Dan I also think there is power in "a network-centric
management view".

Now I need some clarifications. Forgive the brusk tone. I don't know
the answers - I just think some more clarity and comparison and
investigation will help.

Re: the rationale.

What do you mean by "most of them make some non standard
configurations files, which make difficult for sysadmins to tune their
services.". Won't the proposed ucsa xml files be the same thing?

Re: the use case: how will this let Bob later "edit the config files
by hand" without the tool getting confused?

Launchpad is littered with unimplemented simple server admin specs.
Why will this be so successful that upstreams or packagers will do the
hard work of doing good backends?

Or why not work with or build on eBox or webmin, and just make a new user
interface (if you think ncurses will really be popular with the Alices
and Bobs of the world)?

Cheers,

Neal McBurnett http://mcburnett.org/neal/

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 06-05-2008, 04:03 AM
Nicolas Valcarcel
 
Default RFC: Centrilized managment console

Well, the plan is to have some things ready for intrepid, we have
separate the project on 3 different phases: write backends, write
interfaces for those backends, write the UI Frame for manage those
interfaces in a graphical way, so for intrepid at least we need to have
a bug group of backends and for intrepid+1 all of them and some
interfaces, that was the idea we talk about on UDS.

On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 21:22 -0400, Jonathan Jesse wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 9:10 PM, Jonathan Jesse <jjesse@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 7:24 AM, Dan Shearer <dan@shearer.org>
> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 08:00:31PM -0500, Nicolas
> Valcarcel wrote:
> > I have been working on the blueprint of a
> centralized managment console
>
> :
> >
> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/ubuntu-centralized-services-administrator
>
>
> I'm not sure how best to contribute, so I'll start
> with a few comments
> here first.
>
> Rationale
> ---------
>
> I wonder if the Rationale section is maybe looking at
> the right things
> from the wrong starting point. To me the deeper
> analysis is:
>
> Ubuntu Server has no awareness of itself as a
> product.
>
> Yast, webmin and the rest don't address this either.
> Personally I'd be
> delighted to stick with existing Ubuntu Server tools
> for managing
> services (thanks, Debian, upstreams!) and just overlay
> a higher order of
> understanding and control. Which, at our later option,
> we can make as
> GUI as we like, or as is required.
>
> There's a subtle point here that was only hinted at
> before, I can't
> remember who made it. The good thing a lot of us see
> in the Microsoft
> admin tools is that they have this higher order of
> understanding to some
> degree. Not so much just that there is a GUI. And that
> is where I think
> some of the debate on this list has been like ships
> passing in the
> night, people not realising that the others are
> talking about different
> things. I despite a mandatory GUI as much as the next
> Unix person. But I
> recognise value in a network-centric management view,
> such as delivered
> nicely by some GUI tools.
>
> Outline Sketch Implementation
> -----------------------------
>
> Following is a sketch of a commandline tool
> ubuntu-server-admin.py that,
> if it existed, would give me confidence that a useful
> admin tool could
> be built on top of it. My tool would be interacting
> with existing Linux
> and Debian management facilities, and would use a
> database. I have a
> clear idea for how the database would work but that's
> detail.
>
> u-s-admin --report --overview returns an XML summary
> file that says:
> name = X, otherwise known as Z
> services I'm running that matter to users are A,B,C
> the locations of my vital data are D, E, F
> the network services I depend on are G, H I
> the network servers I depend on are J, K, L
> the machines to which I log messages are M and N
> the machines monitoring me are O and P
>
> (where I say 'machine' above it is likely 'CNAME' in
> reality to avoid
> hard coding)
>
> u-s-admin --report --depend-network-services would
> return:
> DNS server details, and their current status
> KDC server details and status
> :
>
> u-s-admin --report --depend-network-servers would
> return:
> Server J: rsync for backup, on port X; and current
> status
> Server K: SQL server for webapp we're running; and
> current status
> Server L: web proxy for accellerator for Apache
> we're running; and current status
>
> Given this level of awareness, next we need to
> configure these things.
> The fact of this configuration would not be kept in
> the database, the
> database would only be for the higher-level
> understanding. This would be
> making calls to debconf or apachectl or whatever makes
> sense, and these
> tools just manage state the same way they always did.
>
> --
> Dan Shearer
> dan@shearer.org
>
> --
>
> ubuntu-server mailing list
> ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
> More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
>
>
> Dan,
>
> I agree that I don't want to see a nice GUI environment, but I
> do want to be able policies against a group of computers that
> will report information back to me.
>
> So what happens after I do a u-s-admin -report? How does the
> data get displayed? How can i report against u-s-admin? I
> would like a list of computers that are my DNS servers in my
> environment or a list of my SQL servers in the environment?
>
> XML is great that once you define that information it can be
> transmitted/delt with however you want to.
>
> Let me think more on this
>
> Replying to my own post:
>
> I think we should mandate a GUI environment. Something that can be
> schedued to run over and over again
> Nicolas,
> Just wonder if this is something that should be targeted to Intrepid
> +1? That way we can run it and test it for intrepid and move forward
> as we work towards the next ZLTS
>
--
aka nxvl
Key fingerprint = BCE4 27A0 D03E 55DE DA2D BE06 891D 8DEE 6545 97FE
gpg --keyserver keyserver.ubuntu.com --recv-keys 654597FE

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 06-06-2008, 04:31 AM
"Nicolas Valcarcel"
 
Default RFC: Centrilized managment console

As we talk on Prague, one idea was to have some kind of diference between the tool generated configuration and the user edited options, for example if the tool read and write until it find a line containing "Stop here" or some other section identifier, in which case it will be acepted some hand made edition to the configuration files. That's what i meant on this part you paste here i just need to specify it in more detail.


On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 8:28 PM, Neal McBurnett <neal@bcn.boulder.co.us> wrote:

Re:

*https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/ubuntu-centralized-services-administrator




First, thanks! *I think something along the lines of a simplified

admin for servers is critically important for Ubuntu to deliver on its

mission. *And I do think that due to the huge demand, we need a GUI

option, whether or not I use it....



And I also suffer from what I think many on the team do - as a

Unix/Linux hacker for over 30 years, I'm used to the command line and

don't want some simplified tool to muck things up for me - I'm not one

of the target users, and find it hard to find time to get myself in

that mindset and work on this stuff.



But like Dan I also think there is power in "a network-centric

management view".



Now I need some clarifications. *Forgive the brusk tone. *I don't know

the answers - I just think some more clarity and comparison and

investigation will help.



Re: the rationale.



What do you mean by "most of them make some non standard

configurations files, which make difficult for sysadmins to tune their

services.". *Won't the proposed ucsa xml files be the same thing?



Re: the use case: how will this let Bob later "edit the config files

by hand" without the tool getting confused?



Launchpad is littered with unimplemented simple server admin specs.

Why will this be so successful that upstreams or packagers will do the

hard work of doing good backends?



Or why not work with or build on eBox or webmin, and just make a new user

interface (if you think ncurses will really be popular with the Alices

and Bobs of the world)?



Cheers,



Neal McBurnett * * * * * * * * http://mcburnett.org/neal/



--

ubuntu-server mailing list

ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com

https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server

More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam



--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:30 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org