On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Jeff McCune <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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? > > > post_resources_eval as opposed to post_resource_eval? Is that too small a syntactic distinction? -- James Sweeny Professional Services http://puppetlabs.com/ *Join us at PuppetConf 2014, September 23-24 in San Francisco - * http://bit.ly/pupconf14 -- 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/CAKDACKu0%2BaJnrVO-N8P4mgKvTQ08hrABdsR6wQXCyifobsnrRQ%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
