JeffOllie/ConfigurationManagement

glump

[1]

Pro

• Uses apache/mod_python so we have full range of authentication/access including
• Does one thing: serves up customized configuration files
• Implemented in python
• Upstream maintainer is closely associated with Fedora (SethVidal)

Con

• Would have to write custom scripts to perform many of the tasks that the other solutions offer

cfengine

[2]

Pro

• Already packaged in Extras

Con

• Cryptic configuration language

bcfg2

[3]

Pro

• Implemented in Python
• Uses SSL to encrypt XML-RPC communication
• Configuation files are in XML

Con

• Uses a simple shared secret to authenticate clients
• Not currently in Extras [4]
• Currently uses a license similar to BSD with the attribiution clause, although there is support upstream for swicthing to a different license.

puppet

[5]

Pro

• Uses SSL to encrypt communication
• Uses X.509 certificates to authenticate clients
• Already packaged in Extras

Con

• Implemented in Ruby (which makes it difficult for Fedora infrastructure people to hack on it since few know Ruby)
• Must learn new domain-specific language to configure.