Which SCM to choose? Bcfg2 vs CFEngine?

Question

Software and Internet Services

Chef and Puppet are not suitable due to the fact that it is required that ruby ​​be installed on clients.
What to choose from bsfg2 and cfengine? What are the pros and cons of both?

Answer 1

CFEngine has a large community and a lot of documentation with examples. Whereas bcfg2 is much less documented, but you can try to extend it to your needs (Python is quite easy to learn).
If you want to take a tool and work with it (and not look for bugs and read the source code) - take CFEngine.
But Chef/Puppet will still be a much more flexible tool. Yes, and Ruby is installed from the repositories for almost all distros. At one time, I chose between Chef / Puppet / Bcfg2 (I write in Python myself, so I leaned towards the latter) - as a result, Chef won - as it is a very good community, a lot of documentation, and Ruby turned out to be very close for a Pythonist. (Sh. for CentOS I use the rbel.frameos.org/from which chef-client is automatically bootstrapped along with ruby ​​and modules - no problems arise)

Answer 2

Chef has the most developed community, so if possible, it is better to use it.
If for some reason you can’t use it or don’t want to, you should look towards SaltStack or Ansible - they are both written in python and are quite simple.
Puppet would no longer recommend to anyone. It used to benefit from simplicity, but with the advent of SaltStack and Ansible, I'm not sure if it still has any advantages.
I didn’t work with CFEngine or Bcfg2, but since they aren’t talked about much, I would assume that quite a few people know how to work with them, so few people after you will be able to support them - I wouldn’t use them for a serious project.