On Saturday, February 1, 2014 7:48:53 AM UTC-6, bert hajee wrote:
>
> The discussion seems to go in the direction of not having a provider.
>


I must have missed all that.

 

> easy_type is by no means at all meant to stop using a provider. Actually, 
> it is by no means a total replacement for the Type and Provider pattern. 
> What it is, is an add-on module for people, less knowledgeable about Puppet 
> (and the intricacies of Types and providers) to have a custom type for an 
> easy kind of resource.
>


And as far as it goes, it looks like a good and useful tool, as long as its 
limits are understood.

 

> Probably only on one kind of OS. 
>  
>


I think that's an understatement.  Inasmuch as the key methods are defined 
on the type, the module really supports only custom types with a single 
provider.  That is to say, although additional providers could be written, 
it looks like easy_type would start to get in the way more than it helps 
for the second and subsequent provider.  That's not necessarily a problem 
in any particular case, but it does make easy_type a special-purpose tool.

 

> That said about the current discussion, what I like about the discussion, 
> is that we seem to all have the idea, it should be easier to make custom 
> types. While we disagree on (at least some) of the directions I took with 
> easy_type. Why not turn this into a discussion on what we would like to see 
> in an easy way to build a type.
>
> I'l start, but please join:
> - A way to keep it close to people who know about the resource, but less 
> about Puppet
> - Be able to easy abstract different OS-es and version (Like the current 
> provider
> - Make it easier to call a set of standard available (and extendable) 
> validators
> - Make it easier to call a set of standard available (and extendable) 
> mungers.
> - Make it easy to gradually build the os command by stating a base part 
> and extending it if a property or a name is specified in the resource 
> definition.
>
>

Absolute top of my list, ever since I first played with custom types:
- Formal, complete, public documentation of the API Puppet provides to 
custom types and providers
- Formal, complete, public documentation of the API Puppet expects custom 
types and providers to expose

Nothing else even comes close.  The guides PL provides around this area are 
helpful -- and more so now than they used to be -- but they are not an 
adequate substitute for *bona fide* API docs.  Moreover, without good 
reference docs it's hard even to discuss what new features could benefit 
Puppet, because there is no shared understanding of what Puppet already has.


John

-- 
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 [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-dev/b5339852-5f31-4c0d-a31e-ea3d2c9676ac%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to