Can one of the developers please comment on #11996
(https://github.com/ansible/ansible/issues/11996)?
Again, this was acknowledged as a bug by abadger in [1]. It had been
fixed in 2.0, but then regressed again (as expected [2]). As I note in
the GitHub thread, the current behavior makes role
, it
will stay that way.
I'm going to remove the "include_vars" from playbook until Ansible 2.0
arrives!
Thank you!
2015年10月3日土曜日 4時08分08秒 UTC+9 Dan Stillman:
I think that's the issue I reported here:
https://github.com/ansible/ansible/issues/11996
<https://githu
I think that's the issue I reported here:
https://github.com/ansible/ansible/issues/11996
Initially closed as a "possible misunderstanding", then acknowledged as
broken on 1.9 and fixed on 2.0, then broken again on 2.0, and the issue
was left closed. Seems pretty clear to me that it's not the
On 9/15/15 12:57 PM, Patrick McMahon wrote:
Is something like this possible when defining a dictionary in
defaults/main.yml:
|
agent_instances:
"{{ [ansible_fqdn] }}":
port:5912
"{{ [ansible_fqdn]-2 }}":
port:5913
|
I want to then call |agent_instances.keys() | join (",") |in a
On 9/3/15 10:11 AM, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
3. Ensure that variable precedence is rigorously tested. Remember that
2.0 is still in alpha, and regressions should be temporary, so long as
you help us by reporting them. We do have some unit and integration
tests and we are working on cleaning
se Ansible — if no effort is made to
ensure that these dangerous bugs stay fixed.
[1] https://github.com/ansible/ansible/issues/11996
[2] https://github.com/ansible/ansible/issues/9497
On 8/18/15 7:08 PM, Dan Stillman wrote:
I really like Ansible and have built a large infrastructure around it
I really like Ansible and have built a large infrastructure around it,
but I'm finding it untrustworthy to the point of being unusable.
In the last 9 months, I've reported 4 variable precedence bugs:
https://github.com/ansible/ansible/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93q=is%3Aissue+author%3Adstillman+
The
