On May 9, 2008, at 3:20 PM, Marcin Owsiany wrote:
> I'm not sure about the exact syntax, but I do think that there
> should be
> a "sticky" relation feature (possibly with another feature to
> "unstick"
> that).
>
> What do you think?
I definitely want something like this feature -- I think I filed it as
an enhancement request a while ago.
Really, what we need is a way to specify a relationship to all
resources matching a given query, or of a given type.
I'm kind of thinking the idea of using our existing query language --
File <| ... |> -- combined with overrides *might* work, but it would
look silly because most times you wouldn't have any parameters:
Package <| |> { require => Exec[blah] }
I've been thinking of adding something like this anyway because people
sometimes need to override values in collected resources.
Generalizing this syntax into a query syntax that allowed you to
perform operations on sets of resources would be a good idea.
--
The one thing more difficult than following a regimen is not imposing it
on others. -- Marcel Proust
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Luke Kanies | http://reductivelabs.com | http://madstop.com
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Developers" 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-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
