What issues are there with dynamic includes except for included files
which do not do anything?

If there was such a huge problem to discuss this, I wouldn't go for a
change in behaviour of include itself but add a new plugin, e.g.
static_include, or include_static.

Inline...

# kraM

On 21:57 Mon 14 Mar, James Cammarata wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 8:22 PM, Strahinja Kustudić <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> 
> > I like the idea, but I don't like the proposal. I would do the same thing,
> > but the other way around. With your proposal it would break backward
> > compatibility with 1.9 if you don't update all your includes, or update
> > ansible.ini. Also most of the includes are static anyway (since dynamic
> > ones didn't work pre 2.0), so why not make them all static by default.
> >
> 
> I went this way to avoid introducing problems with those who have already
> adopted 2.0. We discussed this internally in depth, and flipping the
> defaults would break everyone who was using 2.0 and upgrading to 2.1. We
> feel at this point that most people who have not upgraded are avoiding
> doing so because of backwards incompatibilities with 2.0, so this is mainly
> targeted at giving them an upgrade path.

Upgraded everything to 2.0.0.2, currently upgrading everything to 2.0.1.0
(deprecation warnings not visible due to a bug in 2.0.0.2). If we need to
update everything for 2.1.0, ... Where would that lead to?

> 
> 
> > My proposal is to make all includes static by default and introduce a new
> > keyword *dynamic: yes* (or use *static: no* if you like it more) which
> > you would set on includes where you need them to be dynamic. This would
> > make old 1.9 playbooks backward compatible without any changes anywhere,
> > and if you need a dynamic include in a 2.0 playbook, you will need to
> > change it in just a few places (since there are far less 2.0 playbooks
> > anyway and even lower number of dynamic includes).
> >
> 
> Again, this is something we discussed internally, the option name is
> flexible and we can flip it. However for the reasons above we'd default it
> to `dynamic: yes`.
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Ansible Development" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected].
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
kraM

   Think can be useful if someone is needing some thinking about something.

gpg --recv-keys 0x6C215719

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Ansible Project" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ansible-project/20160315051914.GC21772%40em.streik.ld.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to