On 12/20/2013 10:03 AM, Felix Frank wrote:
On 12/20/2013 03:41 PM, DEGREMONT Aurelien wrote:
Assuming this patch is clean/adapted, is this something Puppet could
accept? or there is still other problems?
I can't really give a well founded comment on this.
I like Jeff's approach in spirit, but as far as execution is concerned,
my gut says that something more object oriented would be preferable.
What I'm saying is, instead of enriching interfaces with values that
need passing, an approach based on inheritance and method overrides
might lead to better maintainability later on.
+1 - doing a rescue because I can't figure out where
Type.retrieve_resource is going for the retrieve method when called from
puppet agent is a pretty sure warning sign that this isn't the cleanest
approach. I also noticed that my patch breaks application of stored
resources in modules, probably because that's using the RAL resource
indirector as well.
As an aside, I tested Aurelien's original patch with the mcollective and
datacat_collector modules and noticed the same breakage my patch
exhibited: if ensure is not present in the resources returned from
Type.retrieve, then modules using collected resources will break.
To resolve problems with the patch would I think be intensive, as
anything dealing with stored resources would need to set
ignoreensure=true. It'd be better to go from the opposite direction and
default to the current behavior, but have manifest application invoke
retrieve in a different way (or define its own retrieve).
Jeff
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet
Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to puppet-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-dev/52B46617.8080202%40bericotechnologies.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
