On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 16:18, Nick Fagerlund <nick.fagerl...@puppetlabs.com> wrote: > (For reference: https://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/7783) > > In 2.7, we have both a "cert" application and a new "certificate" face- > based app, and they both have a "generate" action. Unfortunately, they > do completely different things: `puppet cert generate rhubarb.pie.lan` > makes a new signed certificate, and `puppet certificate generate > rhubarb.pie.lan --ca-location remote` submits a certificate signing > request to the CA. That's bad and confusing. > > I would suggest just renaming the action, but since we already have a > certificate_request face, I think we should move it there. (And then > rename it, preferably to "submit".) Does everyone agree on this call, > or is there a better option I've missed?
I think we should build an entirely new Face for interacting with the certificate subsystem, which is a higher level abstraction over the concepts that the user is going to be familiar with. Something more akin to the "legacy" application than the indirection-based faces we currently have. That gives us a chance to build a solid abstraction without the separation that the indirections imply, focused on higher level concerns. Obviously, this will consume the underlying faces we have today, to achieve those results. Daniel -- ⎋ Puppet Labs Developer – http://puppetlabs.com ✉ Daniel Pittman <dan...@puppetlabs.com> ✆ Contact me via gtalk, email, or phone: +1 (877) 575-9775 ♲ Made with 100 percent post-consumer electrons -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-dev@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en.
