On Feb 17, 2:55 pm, Nigel Kersten <ni...@puppetlabs.com> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Joe McDonagh > > <joseph.e.mcdon...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I care a lot and had thought that the path would eventually be the main key > > for retrieving files, with the checksum being sort of like a revision, with > > some extra metadata when you interfaces with the filebucket... > > ok. So it's unacceptable for you to refer to logs or reports to get > the checksum for a given replacement and then restore the file that > way?
I don't currently rely on filebucket for much, but that's partly because recovering files by path is such a hassle. I'm not tied to details of Puppet's implementation, but no, referring to logs or reports to find a checksum by which to retrieve a file of interest is not attractive. Checksum is undoubtedly a convenient key for Puppet's purposes, but people invariably want to recover files by path and timestamp/version. I've never understood why Puppet didn't provide an easier way to do that. John -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
