On Dec 19, 2010, at 6:35 AM, Nigel Kersten wrote:

> On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 12:53 PM, Patrick <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> On Dec 18, 2010, at 7:23 AM, Nigel Kersten wrote:
>> 
>>> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 10:36 AM, Morgan Haskel <[email protected]> 
>>> wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> 
>>>> I've recently started using postrun_command.  It seems very useful, but I'd
>>>> really like to be able to optionally print the output from the postrun
>>>> command so the users can see any relevant messages.  I patched 2.6.4 to get
>>>> this working with the new options print_prerun_output and
>>>> print_postrun_output (both defaulting to false).
>>>> 
>>>> My patch is included below.
>>> 
>>> Thanks for the patch Morgan.
>>> 
>>> Do you think it's reasonable to just always print the output of these
>>> commands? I'm trying to think whether there are use cases where it
>>> shouldn't be displayed that justify the added complexity of more
>>> configuration settings.
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> If the configuration option is left, think that defaulting that setting to 
>> true on "--test" is reasonable?
> 
> I kind of consider us to have dug ourselves into a hole with "--test"
> and I'd like to not make it any deeper :)

I think this sounds like the sort of thing --test was made for, but I can see 
your point, so whatever.

-- 
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.

Reply via email to