Yep, pretty much exactly what I proposed in
https://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/14998
That said, someone offline made a fair argument for it not being another
directive, but perhaps an attribute of the notify or subscribe directive. I
would totally support that idea.
On Jun 18, 2012, at 5:26 PM, Denmat wrote:
> Okay back to the original problem. It's become a bit hard to follow.
>
> Without code change to puppet you're stumped. But without knowing your
> systems a combination of package based deployments and excluding mode or
> owner maybe will get you by?
>
> But with puppet code change, would a way of doing what you are proposing be
> something like this:
>
> file { title:
> owner => name,
> mode => 0755,
> content => content,
> notify.=> service[name],
> notify_on => ['owner', 'content'],
> }
>
> Now I don't know how easy that is to code into puppet, but I think that would
> sound like a useful feature to me.
>
> Regards,
> Den
--
Jo Rhett
Net Consonance : net philanthropy to improve open source and internet projects.
--
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.
