I think it would make it easier to modularize policies, by not having to list all inputs at the top level. For example, currently to integrate the cf-sketch generated runfile in a main promises.cf, you have to (a) load the file, (b) declare additional inputs using a bundle variable, and (c) call the runfile bundle. Of these, I see (b) as a bit of a hack. With file-specifiable inputs, this step could be avoided.
OTOH I don't think it's indispensable, since it can be worked around with relative ease as shown above. > I think it would make cf-promises unable to validate your policy, since > you'd need to actually run the policy to find out the full extent of it. Inputs can already be dynamic, so this is already the case. --Diego On Aug 10, 2012, at 12:57 PM, Ted Zlatanov <t...@lifelogs.com> wrote: > On Wed, 08 Aug 2012 00:31:26 -0500 Nick Anderson <n...@cmdln.org> wrote: > > NA> Has any thought been given to adding inputs from places other than body > common control? > > I think it would make cf-promises unable to validate your policy, since > you'd need to actually run the policy to find out the full extent of it. > Which may be OK, I don't know... I like deterministic behavior, personally. > > Ted > _______________________________________________ > Help-cfengine mailing list > Help-cfengine@cfengine.org > https://cfengine.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine _______________________________________________ Help-cfengine mailing list Help-cfengine@cfengine.org https://cfengine.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine
