On 10/30/2010 11:45 AM, Nigel Kersten wrote:
> http://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/5158
>
> ----------------------- Ticket description ---------------
>
> We have four main ways we can specify file content in a file resource.
>
>
> The source parameter
> The content parameter
> The file function
> The template function
>
> These behave inconsistently in the following ways.
>
> The source parameter, file function and template function all can take
> an array. For source/file, the first file that exists will be used.
> For the template function, we concatenate the templates instead.
>
> The file function takes fully qualified paths only. The template
> function takes fully qualified paths, or dereferences relative paths
> as follows. ‘foo/bar.erb’ –> modules/foo/templates/bar.erb
>
> The latter problem is relatively easily solved, particularly if we
> implement #4885
>
> We are going to have to break backwards compatibility to solve the
> first problem however.
>
> My feeling is that more people make use of the multi-select logic in
> the source parameter/file function than make use of the concatenation
> of the template function.
> -----------------------
>
> I'm opening this up for discussion here on the user list as we need to
> all agree whether it's worth chasing consistency here at the cost of
> breaking backwards compatibility.
>
> It appears that people use both the concatenation and multi-select
> logic. How can we provide both bits of functionality for all these
> methods?
>
> Here's a terrible suggestion that hopefully inspires a better one.
> An array indicates multi-select logic, separation with a colon means
> concatenate.
I would prefer to use " + " as the separator to indicate concatenation.
> 1a. Use the first source that exists.
>
> file { "/tmp/somefile":
> source => ["puppet:///modules/foo/somefile.$hostname",
> "puppet:///modules/foo/somefile.default",]
> }
>
> file { "/tmp/somefile":
> content => template("foo/somefile.$hostname.erb",
> "foo/somefile.default.erb"),
> }
>
> 1b. Concatenate multiple objects
>
> file { "/tmp/somefile":
> source =>
> "puppet:///modules/foo/somefile.$hostname:puppet:///modules/foo/somefile.default",
> }
>
> file { "/tmp/somefile":
> content => template("foo/somefile.$hostname.erb:foo/somefile.default.erb"),
> }
>
> Is this so unsatisfactory that we need to add more parameters? What if
> we pluralized for the concatenation with "sources" and "contents" ?
IMHO, the use of the plural form makes it error prone.
> 2b. New parameter for concatenation.
>
> file { "/tmp/somefile":
> sources => ["puppet:///modules/foo/somefile.$hostname",
> "puppet:///modules/foo/somefile.default",]
> }
>
> file { "/tmp/somefile":
> contents => [template("foo/somefile.$hostname.erb",
> template("foo/somefile.default.erb")],
> }
>
> Alternatively, do we really need to fix this? I think we do, as
> consistency matters a lot to me, but maybe I'm on my own here?
I agree with you that consistency is of great concern and this should be
addressed.
> --
> Nigel Kersten - Puppet Labs - http://www.puppetlabs.com
>
--
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.
