June june · they/sie
0 followers · 0 following
  • Germany & Cyberspace

  • Does infrastructure crimes with Nix and Ansible.

  • Joined on 2024-01-14
Repositories
2
 Projects Packages Code Public activity Starred repositories
8
june pushed to main at CCCHH/ansible-infra 2026-08-03 00:07:05 +02:00
9a78164b7b
 roles(dooris): remove blank line to make ansible-lint happy
june commented on pull request CCCHH/ansible-infra#98 2026-08-02 02:05:42 +02:00
new z9 ccchh router

To clarify: I assume the Debian package isn't sufficient then?

june commented on pull request CCCHH/ansible-infra#98 2026-08-02 02:05:42 +02:00
new z9 ccchh router

Again, I think installing this conditionally, if we also deploy the configs conditionally, makes sense.

june commented on pull request CCCHH/ansible-infra#98 2026-08-02 02:05:42 +02:00
new z9 ccchh router

Spelling "fora" -> "for".

june commented on pull request CCCHH/ansible-infra#98 2026-08-02 02:05:42 +02:00
new z9 ccchh router

I think it would be nice to stick to the list format used in all the other roles for the sake of consistency.

june commented on pull request CCCHH/ansible-infra#98 2026-08-02 02:05:42 +02:00
new z9 ccchh router

If this is commented out, can this be just removed or re-established?

june commented on pull request CCCHH/ansible-infra#98 2026-08-02 02:05:42 +02:00
new z9 ccchh router

Maybe explicitly call this "Internal Club-Services" now that we have the category "Public Club-Services".

june commented on pull request CCCHH/ansible-infra#98 2026-08-02 02:05:42 +02:00
new z9 ccchh router

I assume these deprecated entries are for documentation purposes?

june commented on pull request CCCHH/ansible-infra#98 2026-08-02 02:05:42 +02:00
new z9 ccchh router

This file is commented out in the main netlan.network file and uses the same IP addresses. Maybe just removing it would clear up confusion or are there plans to re-establish it down the line?

june commented on pull request CCCHH/ansible-infra#98 2026-08-02 02:05:42 +02:00
new z9 ccchh router

If this doesn't work on our target platform, than maybe just don't have this check. Does this fail?

june commented on pull request CCCHH/ansible-infra#98 2026-08-02 02:05:42 +02:00
new z9 ccchh router

Same here with the distro check.

june commented on pull request CCCHH/ansible-infra#98 2026-08-02 02:05:42 +02:00
new z9 ccchh router

This setting is missing from documentation in the README.

june commented on pull request CCCHH/ansible-infra#98 2026-08-02 02:05:42 +02:00
new z9 ccchh router

If we hardcode the version anyway, I think we should first check, if this version is already installed locally and only then hit the GitHub API. This avoids unnecessary steps and also avoids…

june commented on pull request CCCHH/ansible-infra#98 2026-08-02 02:05:42 +02:00
new z9 ccchh router

This sentence is now grammatically incorrect. Maybe: "Diverse VMs im z9 (PVE Cluster)"?

june commented on pull request CCCHH/ansible-infra#98 2026-08-02 02:05:42 +02:00
new z9 ccchh router

I guess those commented out options can just be removed, if they aren't needed.

june commented on pull request CCCHH/ansible-infra#98 2026-08-02 02:05:42 +02:00
new z9 ccchh router

I think this handler isn't in use, is it?

june suggested changes for CCCHH/ansible-infra#98 2026-08-02 02:05:42 +02:00
new z9 ccchh router

Generally looks good and thanks for all the work!

june commented on pull request CCCHH/ansible-infra#98 2026-08-02 02:05:42 +02:00
new z9 ccchh router

This option isn't documented in the README.

june commented on pull request CCCHH/ansible-infra#98 2026-08-02 02:05:42 +02:00
new z9 ccchh router

I would still be in favor of just depending on our deploy_systemd_resolved_config role for managing this.

june commented on pull request CCCHH/ansible-infra#98 2026-08-02 02:05:42 +02:00
new z9 ccchh router

If this isn't in use, it can just be removed.