[Ci-users] Ci-users Digest, Vol 18, Issue 7

Gary Knutson knutson198734 at gmail.com
Mon Apr 10 09:58:21 UTC 2017


Who the fuck are you, whore bitch? Name is Amey. What you doing talking to
Dustin?

On Jan 26, 2017 7:00 AM, <ci-users-request at centos.org> wrote:

Send Ci-users mailing list submissions to
        ci-users at centos.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        ci-users-request at centos.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
        ci-users-owner at centos.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Ci-users digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X (Brian Stinson)
   2. Re: Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X (David Moreau Simard)
   3. Re: Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X (Lauren?iu P?ncescu)
   4. Re: Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X (Nigel Babu)
   5. Re: Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X (Brian Stinson)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 11:07:35 -0600
From: Brian Stinson <brian at bstinson.com>
To: ci-users at centos.org
Subject: [Ci-users] Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X
Message-ID: <20170125170735.5wgzfsliclobz76m at ender.bstinson.lan>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Hi Folks,

We've been shipping Ansible 1.9.x on the slaves for a while now. Do any
of you have use-cases to stay pinned to such an old version?

We'd like to update at least to the 2.1 branch (2.2 has some
templating/variable-quoting gotchas) in the near future.

Questions, comments?

--Brian



------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 13:49:41 -0500
From: David Moreau Simard <dms at redhat.com>
To: Brian Stinson <brian at bstinson.com>
Cc: ci-users at centos.org
Subject: Re: [Ci-users] Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X
Message-ID:
        <CAH7C+PrXyUaZUBksYyoFc39v6Z7rGZ6iH_7cPMn_jS3umvWBaQ at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Worth mentioning that 1.9.x and 2.0.x are officially unsupported and
unmaintained [1].

[1]: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ansible-devel/6-6FdxZ94kc

David Moreau Simard
Senior Software Engineer | Openstack RDO

dmsimard = [irc, github, twitter]


On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Brian Stinson <brian at bstinson.com> wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> We've been shipping Ansible 1.9.x on the slaves for a while now. Do any
> of you have use-cases to stay pinned to such an old version?
>
> We'd like to update at least to the 2.1 branch (2.2 has some
> templating/variable-quoting gotchas) in the near future.
>
> Questions, comments?
>
> --Brian
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ci-users mailing list
> Ci-users at centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users


------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 20:16:02 +0100
From: Lauren?iu P?ncescu <lpancescu at gmail.com>
To: ci-users at centos.org
Subject: Re: [Ci-users] Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X
Message-ID:
        <CAE9TcML8itpjPdjZdo+V+OPoW3SSoip5nn2PP+bNzYVKCeiY=A at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

I'm not using Ansible inside CI yet, but I remember having had to adapt
some 1.9 playbooks for 2.x. [1]

Perhaps also worth mentioning, Ansible 2.2.1.0 fixed CVE-2016-9587,
CVE-2016-8647, CVE-2016-9587 and CVE-2016-8647 (the first is about a
compromised remote system being able to run commands on the Ansible
controller - I think 1.9 is also vulnerable [2]). Unless we can afford to
quickly backport such security fixes, wouldn't it be better to use the EPEL
version everywhere inside CentOS?

Regards,
Lauren?iu

[1] https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/porting_guide_2.0.html
[2] https://lwn.net/Articles/711357/

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 7:49 PM, David Moreau Simard <dms at redhat.com> wrote:

> Worth mentioning that 1.9.x and 2.0.x are officially unsupported and
> unmaintained [1].
>
> [1]: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ansible-devel/6-6FdxZ94kc
>
> David Moreau Simard
> Senior Software Engineer | Openstack RDO
>
> dmsimard = [irc, github, twitter]
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Brian Stinson <brian at bstinson.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi Folks,
> >
> > We've been shipping Ansible 1.9.x on the slaves for a while now. Do any
> > of you have use-cases to stay pinned to such an old version?
> >
> > We'd like to update at least to the 2.1 branch (2.2 has some
> > templating/variable-quoting gotchas) in the near future.
> >
> > Questions, comments?
> >
> > --Brian
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ci-users mailing list
> > Ci-users at centos.org
> > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users
> _______________________________________________
> Ci-users mailing list
> Ci-users at centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/ci-users/
attachments/20170125/bb808059/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 09:53:22 +0530
From: Nigel Babu <nigelb at redhat.com>
To: Lauren?iu P?ncescu <lpancescu at gmail.com>
Cc: ci-users at centos.org
Subject: Re: [Ci-users] Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X
Message-ID:
        <CAF2NqgN2DUdY4A8o9sCk04C5Lk5xrywucVkdRkSYg2xm+E5_kg at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

I'm on the latest version via virtualenv. I'd welcome having the latest
version on the nodes by default.

On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 12:46 AM, Lauren?iu P?ncescu <lpancescu at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I'm not using Ansible inside CI yet, but I remember having had to adapt
> some 1.9 playbooks for 2.x. [1]
>
> Perhaps also worth mentioning, Ansible 2.2.1.0 fixed CVE-2016-9587,
> CVE-2016-8647, CVE-2016-9587 and CVE-2016-8647 (the first is about a
> compromised remote system being able to run commands on the Ansible
> controller - I think 1.9 is also vulnerable [2]). Unless we can afford to
> quickly backport such security fixes, wouldn't it be better to use the
EPEL
> version everywhere inside CentOS?
>
> Regards,
> Lauren?iu
>
> [1] https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/porting_guide_2.0.html
> [2] https://lwn.net/Articles/711357/
>
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 7:49 PM, David Moreau Simard <dms at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Worth mentioning that 1.9.x and 2.0.x are officially unsupported and
>> unmaintained [1].
>>
>> [1]: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ansible-devel/6-6FdxZ94kc
>>
>> David Moreau Simard
>> Senior Software Engineer | Openstack RDO
>>
>> dmsimard = [irc, github, twitter]
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Brian Stinson <brian at bstinson.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Folks,
>> >
>> > We've been shipping Ansible 1.9.x on the slaves for a while now. Do any
>> > of you have use-cases to stay pinned to such an old version?
>> >
>> > We'd like to update at least to the 2.1 branch (2.2 has some
>> > templating/variable-quoting gotchas) in the near future.
>> >
>> > Questions, comments?
>> >
>> > --Brian
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Ci-users mailing list
>> > Ci-users at centos.org
>> > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ci-users mailing list
>> Ci-users at centos.org
>> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ci-users mailing list
> Ci-users at centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users
>
>


--
nigelb
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/ci-users/
attachments/20170126/85e58518/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 00:53:45 -0600
From: Brian Stinson <brian at bstinson.com>
To: Lauren?iu P?ncescu <lpancescu at gmail.com>
Cc: ci-users at centos.org
Subject: Re: [Ci-users] Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X
Message-ID: <20170126065345.k73x2nzlbsl3b3l3 at ender.bstinson.lan>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

On Jan 25 20:16, Lauren?iu P?ncescu wrote:
> I'm not using Ansible inside CI yet, but I remember having had to adapt
> some 1.9 playbooks for 2.x. [1]
>
> Perhaps also worth mentioning, Ansible 2.2.1.0 fixed CVE-2016-9587,
> CVE-2016-8647, CVE-2016-9587 and CVE-2016-8647 (the first is about a
> compromised remote system being able to run commands on the Ansible
> controller - I think 1.9 is also vulnerable [2]). Unless we can afford to
> quickly backport such security fixes, wouldn't it be better to use the
EPEL
> version everywhere inside CentOS?

We'd be pretty happy to track the latest version. 1.9.6 was temporary to
enable a project or two that were in the middle of upgrading. If we can
get to 2.2.x I'm all for that.

>
> Regards,
> Lauren?iu
>
> [1] https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/porting_guide_2.0.html
> [2] https://lwn.net/Articles/711357/
>
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 7:49 PM, David Moreau Simard <dms at redhat.com>
wrote:
>
> > Worth mentioning that 1.9.x and 2.0.x are officially unsupported and
> > unmaintained [1].
> >
> > [1]: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ansible-devel/6-6FdxZ94kc
> >
> > David Moreau Simard
> > Senior Software Engineer | Openstack RDO
> >
> > dmsimard = [irc, github, twitter]
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Brian Stinson <brian at bstinson.com>
> > wrote:
> > > Hi Folks,
> > >
> > > We've been shipping Ansible 1.9.x on the slaves for a while now. Do
any
> > > of you have use-cases to stay pinned to such an old version?
> > >
> > > We'd like to update at least to the 2.1 branch (2.2 has some
> > > templating/variable-quoting gotchas) in the near future.
> > >
> > > Questions, comments?
> > >
> > > --Brian
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Ci-users mailing list
> > > Ci-users at centos.org
> > > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ci-users mailing list
> > Ci-users at centos.org
> > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users
> >

> _______________________________________________
> Ci-users mailing list
> Ci-users at centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users



------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

_______________________________________________
Ci-users mailing list
Ci-users at centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users


------------------------------

End of Ci-users Digest, Vol 18, Issue 7
***************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/ci-users/attachments/20170410/b174de57/attachment.html>


More information about the Ci-users mailing list