On 2016-03-20 10:00, cen wrote:
Agree with both statements. If there was documentation about this on createSecurityGroup I'd knew instantly what is going on. It could even be a generic statement that a certain method adheres to GroupNamingConvention. The pattern does not really match my use case because I create a single security group on first run and then re-use it for each new VM (that's why I hardcoded the name).
Ah, like that - in that case, I would imagine Ignasi's suggestion of either setting the RESOURCENAME_PREFIX property, or going a step further and actually overriding the naming convention "generator", might be the right thing to do?
Then you *know* exactly what the resources will look like, and don't have to save that information for reuse later.
Regards ap
