Hi,
It looks like I missed your original e-mail to puppet-dev.
On Fri, 2010-09-24 at 11:20 -0700, Nigel Kersten wrote:
> [cross-posting as I'd like to know whether my intuition about this
> being the most common case is correct]
>
>
> class foo {
>
> file { "/etc/foo.conf":
> source => "puppet:///modules/foo/foo.conf",
> }
>
> }
>
> For me, every single one of my source specifications refers to a file
> inside the current module. My intuition is that this is the most
> common case outside my own deployment, so why don't we optimize for
> it?
>
> class foo {
>
> file { "/etc/foo.conf":
> source => "foo.conf",
> }
>
> }
>
> eg the proposal is that if you don't specify the protocol, server
> address, modules prefix, module name, it is assumed you are referring
> to a file path relative to the 'files' subdirectory of the current
> module.
>
> If you wish to fully specify the source URI, you're free to do so.
My issue with your proposal is that at first glance it will look like a
local copy (which should require an absolute path) and not a remote
copy. This certainly violate the least surprise paradigm for new users.
What about a new URI scheme (ie module) which would do the same:
class foo {
file { "/etc/foo.conf":
source => "module://foo.conf",
}
}
--
Brice Figureau
Follow the latest Puppet Community evolutions on www.planetpuppet.org!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" 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-users?hl=en.
