On 19 November 2010 01:54, Nathan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> You guys may remember me as the dude at puppet camp who suggested in
> the facter meeting about having facts return unknown for example, or
> have a default set of facts. This, oddly to me, seemed to not go over
> well. Let me explain where I'm co
Nathan wrote:
> My point is not to complain about all these things but to try to
> discuss the direction of facter. I got the impression that the main
> reason behind not adding a bit of intelligence to the facts in these
> cases was because of code base size, which again I may be mistaken
> about.
Hi,
You guys may remember me as the dude at puppet camp who suggested in
the facter meeting about having facts return unknown for example, or
have a default set of facts. This, oddly to me, seemed to not go over
well. Let me explain where I'm coming from and why I think the current
state of facter
