On Tuesday, March 3, 2015 at 4:34:43 PM UTC-6, Stefan Schulte wrote:
 

> I am not saying that the current behaviour is correct/better or that your 
> argument is invalid (you have a good point IMHO). I just wanted to point 
> out that it is implemented for quite a while now and personally I am not 
> aware that this caused any problems.
>


Understood.  My rather terse commentary was intended to communicate that 
although I think that autorequirement is inappropriate, I am not interested 
in mounting a likely-futile campaign to get it removed again, and I do not 
intend to engage in an angry diatribe about what a terrible thing it is for 
Puppet to have such an obvious and horrendous flaw -- and how dare you 
personally have anything to do with implementing it?  ( :-) )

If it were of surpassing importance to me that all my tools were designed 
and behaved exactly exactly as I liked, then I would have no choice but to 
write them myself.  Although I can be impassioned, in the end, I'm a lot 
more pragmatic than that.


John

-- 
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/83c8406c-fd1c-40bc-abb5-2ed0831dc038%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to