azure VS controller_configuration

There is already a successor collection, azure.azcollection, in the community package which should cover the same functionality.

Looks like there is a work in progress PR to fix this in https://github.com/ansible-collections/azure/pull/1112

https://github.com/Azure/WALinuxAgent - I think this is the equivalence of GCP guest-agent, serving similar functionalities, and is pre-installed on all official images, otherwise basic things like authentication and image baking will break.

By setting the provisionVMAgent property to false when creating a virtual machine, WALinuxAgent should run with all extensions disabled, and I think that's as minimal as a Linux VM can go on Azure.

This property, however, can't be set via https://github.com/ansible-collections/azure, which is of course another lovely OSS project by Microsoft. I didn't bother to send a PR.

The OMI agent seems to be a different beast that is way more obnoxious. The closest thing on GCP is probably the collectd agent and the fluentd agent installed for Stackdriver Monitoring and Stackdriver Logging? Plus whatever OS config to enable unattended upgrades.

I just learnt from this HN thread about the SSM agent on AWS. That one does seem equally obnoxious as the OMI agent.

https://github.com/ansible-collections/azure or https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/latest/collections/azure/azcollection/index.html#plugins-in-azure-azcollection or https://galaxy.ansible.com/azure/azcollection are all for the same project that manages the azure ansible modules.

So I created a bug - 445

infra.controller_configuration 2.5.1 has been released. This Ansible collection allows for easy interaction with an AWX or Ansible Controller server via Ansible roles using the AWX/Controller collection modules.

The controller_configuration collection version 2.4.0 has been released.

The Infra config as Code collection group will have a Public Office hours meeting on May 11th at 9am EST/1pm UTC. Details here.

one thing is to play to what you know. Also know that collections can be roles, modules, or both. A few biased collections to look at to see the difference would be infra.controller_configuration - a set of roles to implement either the awx.awx collection or ansible.controller collection for doing configuration as code.

multiple collections with grouped roles, then playbooks to execute those roles as needed. You can also do role include like dispatch here to make it more flexible.

The infra collections have had recent updates: * infra.ah_configuration 1.1.0 Automation hub and galaxy_ng configuration. Majorly improved testing and as a result of fixes all modules and roles work on the last 3 versions of galaxy_ng and Automation Hub. * infra.controller_configuration 2.2.5 Various fixes and additions and improvements to collection, including methods to export configuration files from controller to be used by the collection. * infra.ee_utilities 2.0.6 Updated several bugs and add ability to use types in collection requirements for building execution environments

All of the collections in this group have recently released changes. This includes: * infra.controller_configuration 2.1.9 released to be compatible with recently added AWX changes. Changelog here. * infra.ah_configuration 0.9.2 Automation hub and galaxy_ng configuration. Fixed various major errors, including a major publishing error. Changelog here. * infra.ee_utilities 2.0.1 Updated to add several use cases to Execution Environment Creation. * infra.aap_utilities 2.2.2 Update to OCP installer to allow individual components.

For the server configuration, its on the kubernetes side, however for the AWX configuration of projects, job templates, credentials and the like is the redhat_cop.controller_configuration collection. It uses the awx.awx collection or the ansible.controller configuration to interact with the API to manage things in AWX. The collections are built to work with Ansible Automation Controller, but 99.9% of the time its going to work with AWX.