David -- > That's the internal/implementation side of it. Please see below for explainations about the frills > I added for the more "user"/developer oriented spec in my mail.
I saw it, I'm just not sold on it (yet). The internal side, as you call it, looks pretty clean and high payoff; the additions are (IMHO) lower payoff and more problematic. I'm not saying that I couldn't be convinced, but I (and I'd thought we) had stopped where we did for exactly that reason. > We didn't talk about it. But how would puppet reference the following resources in a log message? By their titles. And for this reason users shouldn't give resources titles that they won't be able to subsequently recognize, just as now. Also the question arose around Trevor's mail how storedconfig's > resources.title is filled. Which, like the log message, is more of a > usability thing than anything else, because the user would expect a > "well-formed" title, that corresponds to the specified parameters, > independently of how they are specified. > Ditto with storeconfigs; I'd say use the title, as now. The idea is very simple when it's unidirectional and very complicated (or perhaps "simple but full of edge cases") when you try to make it bi-directional. BTW, I'll be back in the office as of today & will kick this around with Jesse, who may convince me one way or the other, and I'll be trying to get the patches I promised you by the end of this coming week out ASAP . -- Markus ----------------------------------------------------------- The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it. ~George Bernard Shaw ------------------------------------------------------------ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Developers" 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-dev?hl=en.
