Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

"Brew for DevOps" #167

Closed
RothAndrew opened this issue Nov 9, 2021 · 7 comments
Closed

"Brew for DevOps" #167

RothAndrew opened this issue Nov 9, 2021 · 7 comments

Comments

@RothAndrew
Copy link
Contributor

User feature request, Details TBD - Would love to see a "registry" of common packages that one can deploy, with the ability to host a private registry (because air gap)

@RothAndrew
Copy link
Contributor Author

Other considerations: How do we make environment-specific configuration (like Big Bang controlPlaneCidr and nodeCidr) configurable so we can make one package that works in different environments?

@RothAndrew
Copy link
Contributor Author

asking for a place to keep / host / serve pre-built versions of them
this ^

Just like I can do brew install kubectl they'd like zarf deploy doom... or something to that effect

@btlghrants
Copy link
Contributor

Right, gotcha. This is different from "components" because they're all about how the "Zarf Cluster" runs, not so much about the things that "the Zarf cluster" would serve for end users.

@btlghrants
Copy link
Contributor

btlghrants commented Nov 9, 2021

Seems like a cool idea... but also like it'll require a lot of storage space since we'd basically be storing/re-hosting (potentially) a bunch of copies of repackaged binaries + container images + git repositories + etc. 🤔

@RothAndrew
Copy link
Contributor Author

The MVP for this could be just the ability to host your own private registry, and then decide if it is worth us hosting a public one (or getting someone else to do it)

@RothAndrew
Copy link
Contributor Author

But, we can already do a zarf package deploy on remote assets, so that may be sufficient already for this.

@jeff-mccoy
Copy link
Contributor

Closing this older issue now that we have a lot of new capability that with #550 and #621 are merged in.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants