On Fri, 2020-04-17 at 09:31 +0200, Thorsten Kukuk wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, Imobach González Sosa wrote:
We have started started to analyze and build a list of the things we would like to address, but we would love to hear your opinion. Do you have some use case you would like to see supported? Which problems have you faced when using AutoYaST? Which features do you miss? Do you have a different vision of what AutoYaST should be (we can learn from those opinions too)?
If I look at something like installing a kubernetes cluster: - many similar machines - most of installation and configuration is identical - small changes in configuration, package list, partitioning, depending on the role of the node.
So you have about 5-6 autoyast.xml files, which are all to about 98% identical. Keeping this files in sync is pretty hard. I would like to see that autoyast makes it much easier for the user to maintain one file with small variations which can be used for all roles.
Thorsten
A partial solution to this problem already exists in the form of AutoYaST's rules & classes feature: https://documentation.suse.com/sles/12-SP4/html/SLES-all/rulesandclass.html I've had a single common autoyast.xml with the 2% differences being in 4-5 class-specific xml snippits, only containing the different bits. Then you can use either auto matching rules or dialogues to declare the class (aka role of the node) and you get the approrpiate result in the end. That said, it's certainly an area where dramatic usability improvements could be made. Needing to have a special folder structure with everything named perfectly is a bit of a clunky mess, just wanted to make the point that there's a starting point for solving that use case already. I'd certainly like to see a new AutoYaST go more in that direction of modular configuration. Richard -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org