On 11-09-06 12:15 PM, David Kavanagh wrote:
> Thanks,
> It wasn't clicking that it was an array notation.
hep, no problem ;)
I thought it was a little bit weird too, to be changing from "include
classname" to "class { 'classname': ...}". (e.g. because of the 'class'
reserved word, it now looks like you're defining a new class inside your
nodes)
But I guess once you get the hang of it, it's not that bad. Being able
to use the same notation as other kinds of resources is a good thing.
--
Gabriel Filion
--
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.
