On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 11:34 PM, Garrett Honeycutt <garr...@puppetlabs.com> wrote: > On 8/16/12 10:44 PM, Douglas Garstang wrote: >> So, this has always puzzled me a bit. By convention, init.pp contains >> one class, named the same as the module. However, what is the >> convention when the module may have multiple external access points? >> Say you have a module called 'syslog' which provides both a client and >> a server class. I typically have used syslog::server and >> syslog::client. I've ended up using this convention more than init.pp >> because I don't know when I first put the class together exactly what >> it's going to do. In module mymodule, rather than create init.pp with >> class mymodule, I'll call it mymodule::base or something and stick it >> in base.pp. Confused... >> >> Doug >> > > Not all classes are meant to be directly included by nodes. A common > practice would be having a module where you might have a base class, > such as syslog and other sub classes, such as syslog::client and > syslog::server. Class syslog would contain resources that were common to > both syslog::client and syslog::server (ie: they both have a package and > a config file). Both syslog::client and syslog::server might include (or > possibly inherit) the syslog class. In this setup, a node might include > syslog::server or syslog::client, but not syslog directly. When using > this pattern, be sure to comment in your base class that it is not meant > to be included directly.
Garrett, thanks. Aware of all that, but I'm not sure you really answer my question. :) Doug. -- 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.
