On Apr 14, 2:24 am, Felix Frank <felix.fr...@alumni.tu-berlin.de> wrote: > Hi John, > > On 04/13/2011 05:47 PM, jcbollinger wrote:
[...] > > For instance, perhaps you > > have a user::virtual class that on some nodes declares virtual LDAP > > users, but on other nodes delares the same virtual users as local. > > Such a class might provide a parameter by which the User provider can > > be specified. Other classes that want to realize users should include > > user::virtual, but they don't care which User provider is in play. > > You get something similar by having some resources in each type of node > require (by metaparameter, not by function) the class in question. > No, it won't get auto-included with default parameter values, but you do > get a meaningful error message. Yes, but what I would actually do right now is use extlookup(). It solves the problem cleanly, and the resulting manifests just work. It looks like the problem could as easily be solved with PDL, or with a mechansim for allowing multiple inclusion of parameterized classes. But addressing it via today's version of parameterized classes opens you up to needless errors and therefore makes your manifests harder to maintain. 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.
