James Turnbull wrote: > Brad wrote: >> On Jun 5, 12:39 am, James Turnbull <ja...@lovedthanlost.net> wrote: >>> But yes it was a little confusing. I've edited the page to make it >>> easier to understand. Please let me know if that has helped. >> Thanks but it still didn't seem very clear to me. Might as well just >> explain the situation right at the top. I just made a page edit. >> > But your edit is, in fact, not correct. The last section in the page is > the legacy section. All other sections are correct. You still create, > test and run facts as described. The only change is the use of the > plugins in modules approach rather than factsync.
Though perhaps I should not say - not correct - rather calling out the legacy distribution method at the top of the page is likely to make people confused. I've made the legacy section title clearer and explained and expanded several sections of the page to very clearly point to the pluginsinmodules page. Regards James Turnbull -- Author of: * Pro Linux Systems Administration (http://tinyurl.com/linuxadmin) * Pulling Strings with Puppet (http://tinyurl.com/pupbook) * Pro Nagios 2.0 (http://tinyurl.com/pronagios) * Hardening Linux (http://tinyurl.com/hardeninglinux)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
