On Tuesday, October 7, 2014 9:10:11 PM UTC-5, Daniele Sluijters wrote: > > Separate types undoes basically what "package" now tries to make as > transparent as possible. I guess a case could be made to have "package" > only deal with the OS native package provider and have separate types and > providers for "secondary" packages like gem, wheel/egg/whatever etc. > > Reposting with quote for clarity -
This is the best idea I've heard. Certain puppet types intend to provide an abstraction. This abstraction only works for native package providers in this case because anything else requires the user to make an informed decision. I think having all other package providers be separate types is just fine - package_gem or gem or whatever route you want to go is fine. It seems this might be the only sane and agreeable solution to a problem people have fought for years. Keep the current providers in the package type (but deprecate) and create the new providers. We have a great opportunity to do this with Puppet 4 coming up. > -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-dev/cc5b524b-d087-4d8c-b274-33e580032107%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
