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

Re: [Pulp-list] pulp backend thoughts -- perl modules?

On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 10:48:11AM -0500, Randy Barlow wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Feb 2013, Steven Roberts wrote:
> >Not sure if python or ruby have arch specific binary packages like
> >perl does.
> Python packages are typically distributed using the Python Package Index
> (PyPi) upstream, and a nice client side package manager called pip is
> used to retrieve them. Many Python packages are written in pure Python
> code, and those are really just text files that need to be put in the
> right places. However, some Python packages contain C components, and
> pip will ususally build those packages on the client end when requested
> to install them.
> For some people, it is preferred not to have build tools on the client
> system, and in those cases it is best to use the system package manager
> (yum, apt, etc.) to install those Python packages.

same conclusions I was coming to.  having all of the compilers and such
everywhere is not ideal, so doing the build and conversion to rpm up
front sounds like still the best idea for both perl and python then.

> I don't know much about Perl. In my limited knowledge, I am not aware of
> a Perl package manager similar to pip. Does anything like that exist? If
> so, it might be useful to make a Perl plugin for Pulp that uses that
> package manager on the client side. If not, it might be best to continue
> as you have, packaging Perl modules as RPMs.

yes, there is a CPAN tool.  pip probably has more features, but I am
guessing python's pip got its inspiration/heritage from perl's cpan :)

so we could have a pulp-consumer use the cpan interface, but for
C component perl modules the pulp-consumer would then have to build
locally.  And I don't like the a pulp-consumer having to create content
from bits it gets from the pulp server.  I like installs to be mainly
file copies and config file setup.

so thinking pulp backends seem to make more sense when used for direct
installabe bits like rpms, .deb's, puppet modules onto puppet masters,
and a sick thought just crossed my mind... .msi bundles for windows :)


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