On Monday, October 15, 2012 4:32:28 PM UTC-5, Ellison Marks wrote: > > I don't intend to use parametrized declarations(Right now I'm simply using > hiera_include in the default node for everything and loving it). I do > however, very much like the convenience of the new syntax. In addition, my > use case for default values in the puppet backend that shipped with the > class wasn't terribly complex, so simply including a default value in the > class itself serves my needs well. > > In my case, the new features are simply a more convenient way of doing > what i was already doing(sans the array and hash functionality). > > I don't see it, but that's a question of style and personal preference. Other than the effort required to get from here to there, there is nothing inherently negative about your plan as you describe it. Please don't take my comments as personal criticism.
I truly am interested in whether there are advantages to class parametrization that may not be evident to me, but I used your comments mostly as a springboard for the discussion that now ensues. Regulars around here know that I am a longtime critic of Puppet's parametrized class design. It is better in Puppet 3 -- a lot better, in fact -- but there are still some significant issues. I consider it a community service to publicize those issues, both to help people avoid tripping over them and to keep PL's feet to the fire. John -- 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/-/3YOfOaxcwUkJ. 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.
