Rename the `ansible` directory to `manala`

[ogizanagi]

As we've already discussed about with @nervo and @chalasr. (Just not to forget)

[chalasr]

Good reminder which may re-open the discussion. However, this stays a difficult decision to me :) (and I can't imagine for @nervo and @hyvs , a worldwide revolution somehow :trollface:)

Let's try to remember the context: Running manalize on a project involves to store some metadata inside, in order to use manalize diff for keeping the project up-to-date by comparing its env configuration to our latest templates and returning a patch. These metadata make us able to re-build any env on demand (we have some further steps in the pipes, #62 is one). As we don't wanted to introduce yet another (dot)file in the project's root directory (especially not a file which must not be updated manually), we decided to "hide" these metadata into the ansible/ directory, as a dotfile.

Personally, I do like the idea of having a manala directory, first because it represents the brand. All of our roles (as well as the way we set them up) is not something provided by ansible but by manala.

On the other hand, I'm not completely comfortable with dropping ansible/, because actually it makes anyone immediately aware that ansible is at the heart of what we provide.

Another argument we mentioned against renaming is that manala/ would be visible, from a structure pov, somewhere between bin/ and src/ (and that for a symfony/framework-standard-edition project, we can easily imagine it between features/ and node_modules/), whereas ansible/ is pretty much always the first of the list. Imho it's just a matter of habit, being autocompleted from a or m does not make any difference in my terminal prompt.

More generally, if I look at a project and see a manala/ directory, I know who ensures the provisioning, whereas seeing an ansible/ directory doesn't mean anything.

👍 for moving to manala/

@manala/dev thoughts?

Cheers 💋

[benji07]

:+1:

[gfaivre]

Let's play devil's advocate, why do not have ansible/manala ? We ensure to keep both references to Manala AND Ansible (knowing the last one will be far more understandable for the Muggles) and we keep a place to store "non-manala BUT ansible stuff inside".

[ogizanagi]

@gfaivre : The idea is that Manala stack is the actual tool we now use for provisioning. The ansible usage inside is only an implementation detail (and may change one day, or propose other solutions based on docker for instance). Thus we opted for renaming the main directory to manala to be more flexible. But I know this is arguable. Considering we only have one metadata file generated and used by the Manalize CLI tool, I fear a new subdirectory under ansible would not bring much :/

Or maybe you actually suggest to have both manala and ansible directories at the root ?

[gfaivre]

@ogizanagi Nop I was thinking to have an arborescence with ansible as a main point of entry and a manala as a member. But you're right, if we do that we are, more or less, sticked to a solution which potentially will change. And have a dedicated ansible directory just to store a dot file seems a little overkill, I think we should stand to KISS.