On 11/24/2014 04:37 PM, John Bollinger wrote: > A (say) Group_membership resource type could allow group membership to > be expressed the same way for all systems, and it would dovetail > nicely with the new ideas for client-side queries and resource > purging. I think you still end up with a slightly leaky abstraction, > in that only some systems have a concept of users' primary group, but > support for that could and probably should be recast as a provider > feature. On such systems, the Group_membership resource would manage > only secondary groups, just as User.groups does now.
+1 would use. :-) We can even avoid a breaking change - yay for deprecations. Cheers, Felix -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-dev/5473B1EC.8050203%40Alumni.TU-Berlin.de. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
