title: PuPHPet vs Puppet?
body: <p>I've been using <a href="https://puphpet.com">PuPHPet</a> to setup development / staging hosting environments and it's made for very simple and efficient deployments.</p>
  
  <p>However, I'm running into a situation where I need to provide much more detailed directives in various server conf files (i.e., Nginx and Apache configs, cron jobs, etc) and PuPHPet doesn't allow me to do that.</p>
  
  <p>My questions are:  </p>
  
  <p>Is PuPHPet intended purely for basic server setups only?  </p>
  
  <p>If you need to do more with your configuration, should you use PuPHPet, and then modify the manifests manually from there?  Or is this bad because any updates to PuPHPet will overwrite said files?</p>
  
  <p>And lastly, if you need fine tuned control, should you just be writing Puppet configs from scratch (without the use of PuPHPet)?</p>
  
  <p>Edit: Not sure why this is being voted closed.  I'm simply asking why one uses a custom Puppet config over Puphpet, and if they're capable of accomplishing the same provisioning tasks</p>