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-0001.html>