[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Pulp-list] How about we just merge these core features into Cobbler?

seth vidal wrote:
On Fri, 2008-09-12 at 16:22 -0400, Mairin Duffy wrote:
So now I feel like we've come back in a circle, and what has proven to be a losing strategy (fixing what's already in spacewalk) is again back on the table.

Does that make more sense, put that way?

If I dare say it - it sure seems like good synergy! :)

But in all seriousness it does seem like a good place to collaborate
well that helps get pulp's ideas into production and helps the existing
users of cobbler.
Sans UI. :(

am I really offbase here?
I don't think so and thanks for the fresh perspective. I think you helped me realized that my main issue is with the UI bits 'living' in spacewalk, because I've been there for, again, four years trying to make that happen!

okay, I think I know what happened here - reading through the archives

Michael was trying to not say 'why don't we fold pulp into cobbler' that
he never actually said that.

I think he wants the ui work from pulp to be implemented in cobbler. On
the cobbler wiki it has:


under one of them it talks about the webui work that's needed. I think
the goal would look something like:
 - put all of the pulp ui plans in here.

So I don't think it would mean sans-ui at all. I think michael is saying
his ui-fu is limited and that if the people who are working on pulp want
to work on the pulpui w/o having to deal with implementing the backend
parts - they should come to cobbler, implement it there - and then the
users magically get the bits w/o having to have to separate backend
implementations that may or may not match up in all ways.

Does that jive?


yum install seth-translator.

100% absolutely.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]