On Oct 17, 2008, at 2:41 AM, Brice Figureau wrote: > > On Thu, 2008-10-16 at 14:32 -0500, Luke Kanies wrote: >> On Oct 16, 2008, at 12:54 PM, Brice Figureau wrote: >> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I just discovered that the fix for #1202 (and particularly the fact >>> that >>> I added a tags method to TemplateWrapper) broke the following test: >>> should return the processed template contents with a call to result >>> and >>> should set all of the scope's variables as instance variables >>> >>> I didn't perform a thorough analysis, but it is beacause >>> TemplateWrapper >>> is used as a log source. Log sources are asked for their tags by >>> calling >>> the tags method. In the case of TemplateWrapper it is plain wrong to >>> do so. >> >> Why is that? If you're logging from there, wouldn't you want to >> include the tags in the log message? > > I want to list the tags in the log message. > But it will lists _all_ the tags of the catalog, not the tags of the > current context (ie the resource tags) where the template is used. > > When I wrote the patch, I took the original contribution and just > added > some tests above. Maybe the intent of the ticket was not to provide an > access to the catalog tags but to only the current resource tags (ie > scope.tags instead of scope.catalog.tags), or maybe both? > > What do you think would be the best?
You've got this taken care of, right? -- It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems just with potatoes. --Douglas Adams --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
