Re: [Puppet Users] Review of new type provider
Jesse Peterson wrote: Hello, I'm new to both Ruby and Puppet. Puppet is fantastic - loving it so far. I created a new type provider (of parsed file type) for modifying newsyslog.conf files and am hoping some folks would be willing to review it to make sure there are no glaring mistakes or perhaps some shortcuts or language features I've missed since I'm new to both. Any input would be welcome. Either email directly or just comment on the gist if it gets to be off topic: https://gist.github.com/1230749 Looks okay to me - I'd recommend writing some tests for it - ParsedFile providers are notorious for subtle bugs and small changes causing odd effects. How often do new types/providers make it into the base system? Should one pursue that avenue (or perhaps the puppet modules project?). We're trying to keep the core lean and mean. So I'd recommend creating and adding a module to the Forge (http://forge.puppetlabs.com) with your new type and provider. Regards James -- James Turnbull Puppet Labs 1-503-734-8571 Join us for PuppetConf http://www.bit.ly/puppetconfsig, September 22nd and 23rd in Portland, Oregon, USA. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet Users group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
Re: [Puppet Users] Review of new type provider
On Tue, 20 Sep 2011 23:19:36 -0700, James Turnbull wrote: Jesse Peterson wrote: Hello, I'm new to both Ruby and Puppet. Puppet is fantastic - loving it so far. I created a new type provider (of parsed file type) for modifying newsyslog.conf files and am hoping some folks would be willing to review it to make sure there are no glaring mistakes or perhaps some shortcuts or language features I've missed since I'm new to both. Any input would be welcome. Either email directly or just comment on the gist if it gets to be off topic: https://gist.github.com/1230749 Looks okay to me - I'd recommend writing some tests for it - ParsedFile providers are notorious for subtle bugs and small changes causing odd effects. How often do new types/providers make it into the base system? Should one pursue that avenue (or perhaps the puppet modules project?). We're trying to keep the core lean and mean. So I'd recommend creating and adding a module to the Forge (http://forge.puppetlabs.com) with your new type and provider. Regards James I'd definitely recommend writing tests for it, as well. If you're looking for some examples of tests around parsed file based types, you might want to take a look at some of the work that was done to split out the mount type into two separate types[1]. The only tricky part of copying the test setup from the split mount types is that you'll need to have the puppet and facter source trees in addition to your new type's source tree, and make sure that it's available to ruby when you run the tests. I've been achieving this by running the tests with the following: RUBYLIB=`pwd`/../puppet/lib:`pwd`/../facter/lib rspec spec We should really go back and create a README with this info for the split mount type repo. [1] https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppetlabs-mount-providers -- Jacob Helwig , | Join us for PuppetConf, September 22nd and 23rd in Portland, OR | http://bit.ly/puppetconfsig ` signature.asc Description: Digital signature
[Puppet Users] Review of new type provider
Hello, I'm new to both Ruby and Puppet. Puppet is fantastic - loving it so far. I created a new type provider (of parsed file type) for modifying newsyslog.conf files and am hoping some folks would be willing to review it to make sure there are no glaring mistakes or perhaps some shortcuts or language features I've missed since I'm new to both. Any input would be welcome. Either email directly or just comment on the gist if it gets to be off topic: https://gist.github.com/1230749 How often do new types/providers make it into the base system? Should one pursue that avenue (or perhaps the puppet modules project?). Thanks for any assistence or guidance, - Jesse -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet Users group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
