Replies inline; I've butchered the quoting but will try to keep the
attribution correct.
[John Bollinger] Part of my premise here is that you cannot reasonably
> infer from a class declaration alone -- regardless of the form of the
> declaration -- whether its declaring class intends to contain the declared
> one. There has to be something to distinguish the contained case from the
> non-contained one.
This was a valuable piece of insight, thanks.
[Luke] Maybe PuppetDB makes this all irrelevant because it actually builds
> a graph that contains both, and makes that graph easily accessible, but… if
> it's good for PuppetDB, why isn't it good for Puppet?
>
We absolutely plan to consolidate down to one catalog format, which should
be the one used by PuppetDB. I think the graph refactoring work you'd like
to see is desirable but should come as a byproduct of writing new code to
produce and consume these, rather than trying to shoehorn those changes
onto the anchor pattern work.
> [Andy] Here are the possibilities:
>
* resource like syntax for classes expresses containment:
>
> class container { class { contained: parameter => value } }
>
> * a function declares the class *and* expresses containment
>
> class container { contain(contained, { parameter => value }) }
>
> * a function expresses containment, but does not declare the class
>
> class container { class { contained: parameter => value }
> contain(contained) }
>
> * a new "resource type" expresses containment
>
> class container { contain { contained: parameter => value } }
>
I'm most in favour of number 3 here, a function to express the containment
as a separate thing to declaring the class.
[Nick Lewis] A 'contain' function was the decision we came to last time I
> was involved in a conversation about this. That turned into ticket #13045,
> which was closed with the decision that it should be fixed in Puppet
>
> [Luke] I'm in favor of it as a simple, optional, backward-compatible fix.
> Basically, if you're using the anchor pattern now, you can use the contain
> function instead, and properly represents what's going on.
>
+1
--eric0
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to puppet-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-dev@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
