On 17 Dic, 20:51, Scott Smith <sc...@ohlol.net> wrote: > Al @ Lab42 wrote: > > 1- a class for an application, sharing the same name. (IE: apache > > (not httpd) for managing Apache) > > Still I wonder why I (and many) use ssh instead of openssh :-) > > Hmm, I think most of the conventions are sensible, thanks for taking the time > to summarize it all! > > On point #1 however, I kind of disagree: Technically Apache (Software > Foundation) is the > organization, and the web server is Apache HTTP Server. I do agree that > `httpd' is way too generic. > In this case I prefer to use `apache::httpd' and `apache::tomcat' etc. > > Just my opinion :) > > -scott
Right point. I actually would prefer, at this point, httpd rather than apache::httpd, also because otherwise for coherency we should somehow always define the makers of the software. Maybe we could just try to make a list of possible "standardized" modules names, at least for the dubious cases: openssh or ssh? apache or httpd or apache::httpd? dashboard or puppet::dashboard or puppet::nodemanager? ;-) I can't imagine now more similar dubious cases, but surely there are. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
