Julian Simpson wrote: > I would have assumed that you'd always want to qualify the module > names as the best practise. Collisions in namespaces wreak havoc in > many other domains. I'm thinking of Java class names being bound to > domain names as an approach that works elsewhere.
Like rpm/deb packages, modules have a well regulated namespace. Iff there were a clash, those modules would probably come from two different implementors and quite likely do have different enough requirements and overlapping contents that they don't work together anyways. That being said "apache" just is much easier to type than "at.co.black.puppet.apache".[1] Regards, DavidS [1] and also would ruin the pun ;-) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
