Issue #9683 has been updated by Randall Hansen.
To that specific question: I think we should as much as possible use existing options, as long as they are semantically and functionally identical. Options provide context for a command, and the same context can sensibly be provided to very different commands and workflows. There periodically may be an argument to rename (and nicely deprecate) existing options to accommodate different or expanded use. This should be considered before creating new options which are similar to existing ones. ---------------------------------------- Feature #9683: issues with using pre-existing puppet options (UX) https://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/9683 Author: Dan Bode Status: Investigating Priority: Normal Assignee: Category: Target version: 0.6.0 Keywords: Branch: Roadmapped: No Using pre-existing puppet options creates a potential usability issue: Cloud provisioner currently uses the following pre-existing options to connect to the dashboard: 1. report_server 2. report_port There are two issues with this: 1. These options don't show up as options for cloud provisioner when running 'puppet help node classify' 2. We are potentially overloading these option names in a confusing way (a case could exist where the report_server dashboard is not the same as the ENC dashboard) The advantage of using pre-existing options is that is allows you to potentially reuse your existing puppet.conf file -- You have received this notification because you have either subscribed to it, or are involved in it. To change your notification preferences, please click here: http://projects.puppetlabs.com/my/account -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Bugs" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-bugs?hl=en.
