Hi,
that's basically correct, but I'd like to ask you to get more specific
than that.
Both can be desirable:
1. Require a whole class: I don't care which resource makes sure my
apache is installed - I require the whole class to be successfully
evaluated before my dependent resource is applied (or not, in the
presence of failures within the apache class).
2. Require a certain resource: You don't care which module and/or class
declares the resource, as long as it's there.
Personally, I find (2) rather distasteful, since if used consequently,
it will leave you in a jumble of cross-module dependencies at some
point, and if any of those break, you will have one hell of a time
determining the reason.
Cheers,
Felix
On 11/19/2013 04:23 PM, Jon McKenzie wrote:
>
> Maybe I'm thinking about this incorrectly, but it seems to me that
> announcing a dependency ("I need x defined somewhere in order to work
> properly") shouldn't require a class to declare the dependency as well.
> It seems to me that the dependent class should not have to know anything
> about how a particular dependency is defined, just that it is defined.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" 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-users/528B8537.9000603%40alumni.tu-berlin.de.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
