All,
How does this work in the case of multi-party development?
For instance, you now have the Module Forge (woo), but I'm sure you're
going to get two modules with a 'service { "mysql"' or somesuch.
I know that it's easy to say "just be careful", but throwing up the
overworked puny human SA defense, not conflicting on duplicate names
is going to cause a massive amount of headache in my opinion.
How else could this be solved so that people are not bitten by
conflicts? Warnings perhaps?
Thanks,
Trevor
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 5:50 PM, Luke Kanies <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jun 7, 2010, at 7:43 AM, Markus Roberts wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
> This is basically where I'd planned on taking this - either lose the
> requirement that titles be unique (e.g., dependencies are lazy binding
> anyway, so you could just depend on all things that have that title), or
> don't care about unique titles unless there's a relationship involved. I
> prefer the former. Titles are for humans anyway, so they have complete
> control over how it works.
>
>> 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 .
>
>
> --
> Don't hit at all if it is honorably possible to avoid hitting; but
> never hit soft! -- Theodore Roosevelt
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Luke Kanies -|- http://puppetlabs.com -|- +1(615)594-8199
>
> --
> 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.
>
>
--
Trevor Vaughan
Vice President, Onyx Point, Inc
(410) 541-6699
[email protected]
-- This account not approved for unencrypted proprietary information --
--
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.
