Thanks for the feedback, Gareth and Josh. We need to figure out the steps
here, so this is super useful.
A couple minor comments below, and I'm consolidating the replies.
On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Gareth Rushgrove
wrote:
> I'd be happy to see a PR against puppet-module-skeleton
> (https
I don't typically have system packages for either puppet or facter in my
dev environment as I've had bazaar issues in the past where the system
facter has leaked into the bundler env and cause odd test failures.
Has anyone looked into embedding cfacter in a gem?
Another implication, which is CI s
I'd be happy to see a PR against puppet-module-skeleton
(https://github.com/garethr/puppet-module-skeleton) for how you
envisage testing against puppet-agent to work on (on Travis in this
case). That might be a good way of getting a few people from the
module community to comment too.
Ditto a PR r
In the next few weeks we’ll be releasing facter 3, a native (compiled
C++11) implementation of facter. Note that the only packages containing
facter 3 will be the puppet-agent packages (e.g. there will be no facter 3
gems).
This change may have some workflow implications for module developers, and
