On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Ryan Coleman <r...@puppetlabs.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Brian Gupta <brian.gu...@brandorr.com> wrote: >> Will general best practice for forge modules to be developed against >> current latest puppet version, or maintain backward compatibility >> going forward? e.g. - let's say there is a version of a module that >> works with 2.7, when Telly ships will the plan be for the modules to >> be required to support both puppet versions, or just Telly? Or are you >> guys thinking that there will be separate modules for different >> versions of puppet? (Perhaps you guys aren't there yet in your >> planning?) > > I'd love to hear what the communities thoughts are here! :-) > > From my perspective, I think it's up to the module author to determine > what their needs are and author modules accordingly. If they can only > run 2.6 and want to author modules that aren't compatible with some > aspect of 2.7, that's perfectly acceptable. They'll just need to > specify that so those using 2.7 don't install a module that doesn't > work for them. They'd have to re-evaluate their module when a new > version (like Telly) ships.
Ah I had envisioned that the long term plan was for there to be core modules that were written with best practices and that unless you were doing something really funky, they would meet most people's needs. (Either through some sort of official process, or crowd-sourced voting/rating/self-selection). > I added a comment to that ticket suggesting an idea to take the burden > of specifying compatibility off of module author. Perhaps for modules > that provide spec tests, we could automatically test that module > against a matrix of puppet, facter and ruby versions to set and > maintain what the module is compatible with every time a new version > of puppet or facter is released. Just a thought.. and certainly that > could be optional to authors who would rather manually specify > compatibility. Hmmm.. a thought (may be to much).. what if you also tracked incompatible versions. That way if someone wanted to test it with a version of puppet that the author didn't have an opportunity to test, someone could submit a testing patch marking it as compatible or incompatible with specific version(s)? > -- > 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. > -- 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.
