From: david@lang.hm Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2012 04:57:18 GMT Subject: Re: looking for suggestions for managing a tree of server configs Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <7vpq4l1x86.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> On Sat, 13 Oct 2012, Junio C Hamano wrote: > david@lang.hm writes: > >> I've got a directory tree that holds config data for all my >> servers. This consists of one directory per server (which is updated >> periodically from what is currently configured on that server), plus >> higher level summary reports and similar information. >> >> today I have just a single git tree covering everything, and I make a >> commit each time one of the per-server directories is updated, and >> again when the top-level stuff is created. > > It is quite clear to me what you are keeping at the top-level files, > but if a large portion of the configuration for these servers are > shared, it might not be a bad idea to have a canonical "gold-master" > configuration branch, to which the shared updates are applied, with > a branch per server that forks from that canonical branch to keep > the machine specific tweaks as differences from the canonical stuff, > instead of having N subdirectories (one per machine). In an ideal world yes, but right now these machines are updated by many different tools (unforuntantly including 'vi'), so these directories aren't the config to be pushed out to the boxes (i.e. what they should be), it's instead an archived 'what is', the result of changes from all the tools. The systems are all built with a standard image, but the automation tools I do have tend to push identical files out to many of the systems (or files identical except for a couple of lines) David Lang