On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 5:13 PM, markus wrote:
>
> > But I also don't think there's fundamentally anything *wrong* with
> > using whits, since they accurately model the notion of containment,
> > with respect to order: classes have a "start", and a "finish", and
> > there's stuff in between. It d
> But I also don't think there's fundamentally anything *wrong* with
> using whits, since they accurately model the notion of containment,
> with respect to order: classes have a "start", and a "finish", and
> there's stuff in between. It doesn't really feel like a hack to me.
> Ironically, they *
On Friday, August 30, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Luke Kanies wrote:
> On Aug 30, 2013, at 10:47 AM, Andy Parker (mailto:a...@puppetlabs.com)> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Luke Kanies > (mailto:l...@puppetlabs.com)> wrote:
> > > On Aug 30, 2013, at 9:11 AM, Andy Parker > > (mailto:a...@p
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Luke Kanies wrote
>
> Hmm. I'm essentially positive that there was a version of this bug that
> was caused by whits cancelling out when classes were empty, but it sounds
> like that form has been fixed. Either that, or the first time I did a deep
> dive on this,
On Aug 30, 2013, at 10:47 AM, Andy Parker wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Luke Kanies wrote:
> On Aug 30, 2013, at 9:11 AM, Andy Parker wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 1:05 AM, R.I.Pienaar wrote:
>>
>>
>> - Original Message -
>> > From: "Luke Kanies"
>> > To: puppet-
On Friday, August 30, 2013 11:11:52 AM UTC-5, Andy Parker wrote:
>
>
> Here are the possibilities:
>
> * resource like syntax for classes expresses containment:
>
> class container { class { contained: parameter => value } }
>
> * a function declares the class *and* expresses containmen
"Then we're not on the same page, when people want the anchor pattern gone
they
want what you're calling the feature implemented."
+1 to this. This is exactly what Markus, Luke, and I were discussing back
in 2010.
Trevor
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 1:40 PM, R.I.Pienaar wrote:
>
>
> - Original
On 30 August 2013 09:55, Luke Kanies wrote:
> On Aug 30, 2013, at 1:05 AM, "R.I.Pienaar" wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > - Original Message -
> >> From: "Luke Kanies"
> >> To: puppet-dev@googlegroups.com
> >> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 11:27:00 PM
> >> Subject: Re: Anchor pattern (was Re: [Pu
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Luke Kanies wrote:
> On Aug 30, 2013, at 9:11 AM, Andy Parker wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 1:05 AM, R.I.Pienaar wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> - Original Message -
>> > From: "Luke Kanies"
>> > To: puppet-dev@googlegroups.com
>> > Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2
- Original Message -
> From: "Luke Kanies"
> To: puppet-dev@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Friday, August 30, 2013 6:34:13 PM
> Subject: Re: Anchor pattern (was Re: [Puppet-dev] Puppet 4 discussions)
>
> On Aug 30, 2013, at 9:14 AM, "R.I.Pienaar" wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > - Original Messag
On Aug 30, 2013, at 1:05 AM, "R.I.Pienaar" wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Luke Kanies"
>> To: puppet-dev@googlegroups.com
>> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 11:27:00 PM
>> Subject: Re: Anchor pattern (was Re: [Puppet-dev] Puppet 4 discussions)
>>
>> On Aug 29, 2013, at 12
On Aug 30, 2013, at 9:14 AM, "R.I.Pienaar" wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Erik Dalén"
>> To: "Puppet Developers"
>> Sent: Friday, August 30, 2013 5:07:46 PM
>> Subject: Re: Anchor pattern (was Re: [Puppet-dev] Puppet 4 discussions)
>>
>> On 30 August 2013 09:55, Luke Kan
On Aug 30, 2013, at 9:11 AM, Andy Parker wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 1:05 AM, R.I.Pienaar wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Luke Kanies"
> > To: puppet-dev@googlegroups.com
> > Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 11:27:00 PM
> > Subject: Re: Anchor pattern (was Re: [Puppet
On 30 August 2013 11:14, R.I.Pienaar wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Erik Dalén"
> > To: "Puppet Developers"
> > Sent: Friday, August 30, 2013 5:07:46 PM
> > Subject: Re: Anchor pattern (was Re: [Puppet-dev] Puppet 4 discussions)
> >
> > On 30 August 2013 09:55, Luke Kanies
- Original Message -
> From: "Erik Dalén"
> To: "Puppet Developers"
> Sent: Friday, August 30, 2013 5:07:46 PM
> Subject: Re: Anchor pattern (was Re: [Puppet-dev] Puppet 4 discussions)
>
> On 30 August 2013 09:55, Luke Kanies wrote:
>
> > On Aug 30, 2013, at 1:05 AM, "R.I.Pienaar" w
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 1:05 AM, R.I.Pienaar wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Luke Kanies"
> > To: puppet-dev@googlegroups.com
> > Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 11:27:00 PM
> > Subject: Re: Anchor pattern (was Re: [Puppet-dev] Puppet 4 discussions)
> >
> > On Aug 29, 2013,
- Original Message -
> From: "Luke Kanies"
> To: puppet-dev@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Friday, August 30, 2013 3:55:57 PM
> Subject: Re: Anchor pattern (was Re: [Puppet-dev] Puppet 4 discussions)
>
> On Aug 30, 2013, at 1:05 AM, "R.I.Pienaar" wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > - Original Messag
On 2013-30-08 24:27, Luke Kanies wrote:
On Aug 29, 2013, at 12:24 PM, John Bollinger mailto:john.bollin...@stjude..org>> wrote:
On Wednesday, August 28, 2013 5:56:45 PM UTC-5, Andy Parker wrote:
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Luke Kanies > wrote:
On Aug 28, 2013, at 12:38 PM,
On 2013-30-08 6:31, Luke Kanies wrote:
On Aug 28, 2013, at 12:09 PM, Henrik Lindberg
wrote:
On 2013-28-08 19:18, Luke Kanies wrote:
On Aug 28, 2013, at 9:05 AM, Ryan Coleman mailto:r...@puppetlabs.com>> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 8:04 AM, Henrik Lindberg
mailto:henrik.lindb...@cloudsm
On 2013-29-08 20:18, Andy Parker wrote:
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Henrik Lindberg
mailto:henrik.lindb...@cloudsmith.com>>
wrote:
On 2013-28-08 19 :19, Andy Parker wrote:
What I'm thinking (in terms of a workflow a user might perform):
# produce a fully validated
- Original Message -
> From: "Luke Kanies"
> To: puppet-dev@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 11:27:00 PM
> Subject: Re: Anchor pattern (was Re: [Puppet-dev] Puppet 4 discussions)
>
> On Aug 29, 2013, at 12:24 PM, John Bollinger
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Wednesday,
21 matches
Mail list logo
