On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 7:45 AM, Nan Liu <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 10:16 PM, Jeff McCune <[email protected]> wrote: > >> This is just a continuation of a previous thread as to not hijack the >> original discussion. >> >> The question that needs a decision is, should post_resource_eval be >> renamed given the context that it's currently implemented as a hook into >> the point after all resources for a provider are evaluated and we might >> want a hook into the point after each discrete resource is evaluated? >> >> Nan agrees it should be renamed hence the need for a decision. >> > > I'm not sure where this should be documented (is there a ticket?). There > is one more challenge for post_resource_eval v.s. post_catalog_eval. I > believe there is a need to be able to establish a dependency to > post_resource_eval. >
Yeah, I'm thinking the idea of "post catalog eval" is flawed because it's really not after the _catalog_ but rather all provider instances for a given resource type. There may still be quite a bit of the catalog left to evaluate when the hook fires. post_type_providers_eval maybe? -- -Jeff -- 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 [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-dev/CAOXx1vGr6UvbkWNyNu6jwiAb1PNLd0Bt3ZbjMiSZ-sAhrFz2iw%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
