The main thing that we noticed when we switched from the enterprise version to the community version was the difference in cost — the infrastructure is pretty expensive. We work in the education sector so we get really good discounts from vendors. Other universities, including Harvard, use a competing product called Ansible. The only reason they use Ansible is that they got it for a really good price. We tried to get an educator's discount with Puppet, but unfortunately, we couldn't reach an arrangement. That's why we had to switch to the community version.

View full review »

Puppet Enterprise should improve the general extensibility for places where they can't install it.

View full review »

The solution has really complex code, you have to understand the Ruby language and customized Domain Scripting Language (DSL). However, once you know the code then you can move ahead without any problems. To improve the Development learning curve, new Puppet Development Kit should maybe include a Development interface with preloaded DSL Dictionary.

View full review »

Troubleshooting Puppet Enterprise can be somewhat challenging. You can make some changes to implement any ad hoc modifications. It might take a little longer.

View full review »

Puppet Enterprise is more complex and difficult to configure.

View full review »

It needs GUI based automation. There is way too much command line work involved.

Puppet is mainly command line tool with most of the scripts created through declaration. I was hoping they allow creation and deployment of these scripts through GUI based interface. In fact, if possible, they should allow deployment of all of the management infrastructure and agents deployment through process center like mechanism

View full review »

Puppet may be already working on this, however, it would be helpful if they made the product agent-less or making an option for agent-less. They may offer that in Puppet Bolt. I haven't explored that much. 

The compliance side needs work. Puppet doesn't have much in terms of dealing with compliance. Chef has inSpec. On Red Hat, we are getting Insight so that we can run some standard templates for compliance, like CIS or DSR, PCI, or something of that nature. We can use those templates to harden the environments and perform a security checklist within those environments.

There's a lot of scope for enhancement on the DevSecOps side. They should definitely include features for compliance, for both the Linux and Windows side of the devices, as well as for network devices. Compliance is something they need to work on.

It would be great if there was integration with some InfoSec tools like Lenovo.

The pricing of the solution is a bit high.

View full review »

The features I used so far are quite interesting and helpful.

View full review »

Puppet has steep learning curve so you need to spend some time before you can use puppet on your daily. If you only manage a small number of servers the time to create manifest might be longer than you create, edit and copy configuration manually to each server, but if you’re looking for long-term solution of course this is worth doing. Even that the documentation is good, I can’t find enough manifest sample for some basic usage, have to Google a lot, bumping from one blog to another blog. Puppet Enterprise give you limit to manage only 10 machine, but if you need to manage more machine but don’t want to spend money you can use puppet open source. View full review »

We are constantly improving new features, like deploying. But also, I think that they're very strange. It is how the community contributes with the models that they have in Puppet first. But it's a continuous improvement process. We are always discovering new things.

View full review »

We would like Puppet to add more integration for applications.

View full review »