On Wednesday, July 25, 2012 9:57:20 AM UTC-5, Jeff McCune wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 9:54 AM, ZJE <countac...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> I'm still a little confused - is there an example of a type/provider >> where this is done correctly? >> Thanks! >> > > Not that I know of. You could be the first! =) > > What's confusing you? > > As a basic example, here is the initial change set that migrates the > registry module to the convention we recommend of > PuppetX::Puppetlabs::Registry > > https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppetlabs-registry/pull/18/files > > As you can see, we also have to work around the $LOAD_PATH issue in > #14073<http://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/14073>. > This won't be the case in Puppet 3.x as we'll have made modules work when > distributed as Rubygems in #7788<http://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/7788> > . > > -Jeff >
I was trying to figure out the right way to work around the $LOAD_PATH issues, the example helps. I was also wondering if in PuppetX, the "X" was supposed to be the version number, but it doesn't look like it. I've got it working now, many thanks :-) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/ltfMkA1D5k4J. 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.
