Linux

I don't frequent that world much these days, but I personally preferred the agent/pull model when I did. I can't really articulate why, I think I feel comfortable knowing that the agent will run with the last known config on the machine, potentially correcting any misconfiguration even if the central host is down.

The big debate back in the day was Puppet vs. Chef (before Ansible/SaltStack). Puppet was more declarative, Chef more imperative.

I also admit, I don't like YAML, other than for simple, mostly flat config and serializing.

I further admit that Ansible just has a bigger community these days, and that's worth something. When I need to do a bit of CM these days, I use Ansible.

As someone that has never used Puppet, I also wonder this. Ansible is agentless and works on basically anything. What do you gain by requiring an agent, like with this?

Looks like it's a fork of Puppet.

A software to orchestrated and manage software installations and configurations on multiple/many systems using one central system. Puppet is a great tool for medium/large scale system administration and this is a open source implementation of that.

OpenVox is the modern open source implementation of the world's most capable configuration management platform -- trusted by everyone from the smallest hobbyist to operators of some of the largest commercial infrastructures in the business.

Try OpenVox as the engine powering your infrastructure deployment and configuration needs and see why it's the industry standard in resource abstraction and drift remediation.

https://voxpupuli.org/openvox/