-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 30/01/10 6:08 PM, Luke Kanies wrote: > I generally agree with Jesse that it's heinous that we're using this > type of solution, but the existing code is equally heinous. > > I'm comfortable with this change, albeit with the goal of refactoring > more thoroughly at some later date. > > Or is it worth taking the intent of your patch and spending a bit more > time on the code so it provides the needed functionality while being > more maintainable in the long term? >
We keep saying at "some later date" and digging ourselves further and further into monkey patches. How about we bite the bullet and do a hard and fast refactor - starting with these facts and releasing a 1.6.0? Thanks James - -- Author of: * Pro Linux System Administration (http://tinyurl.com/linuxadmin) * Pulling Strings with Puppet (http://tinyurl.com/pupbook) * Pro Nagios 2.0 (http://tinyurl.com/pronagios) * Hardening Linux (http://tinyurl.com/hardeninglinux) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEVAwUBS2Pi6SFa/lDkFHAyAQL8MQgAo+7bV6AANvw2MdO5Mt7+mGwykurBpuNJ fIZXcvC+7tELPC1MLmYDCsCSfi6tSieY/PAKD++C/M+e7NzwGQUwM0lLNgIoZQ/m MY64p34WQYkIJAfDZFSDeeZ7J4uwfPmGgcRU5KXUT7bHwyRJTCW+f1ESzC5Bwh6o df87zUDsIrpd2/sHwBDeII/BCMw6siKOL093hQ9CnLgNQ2n7d/ZmQia0cmtWNmVl Mf54OO+3AbmzP/mGzS8AVNuRV5kXPTFDJgHD3FzSEbOA4Q2T79D4HoUzGHTIqU/S 7NkNZdRpNDm7KXRFobtIik+3s30Mqz0NkqC1MPhvTm0UUc3wON7N7w== =JoJh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- 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.
