----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mohit Chawla" <mohit.chawla.bin...@gmail.com>
> To: puppet-users@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 10:31:28 PM
> Subject: Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Wrapper classes, ordering & anchors
>
> Hello,
>
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 2:44 AM, R.I.Pienaar <r...@devco.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> > i find the anchor pattern both a royal pain and too strict, i dont
> > generally
> > care to bind classes between two resources but instead just before
> > some
> > resource or class
> >
> > class wrapper {
> > include one, two, three
> >
> > Class["one"] -> Class["two"] -> Class["three"] ->
> > Class["wrapper"]
> > }
> >
> > at this point 'include wrapper' will have those 3 classes and their
> > resources completed before anything that requires the wrapper class
> >
> > this is often sufficient enough and satisfies 'just enough ordering
> > hints'
> > to me.
>
> I suppose this is similar to what Luke suggested, that is:
> class wrapper {
> include foo
> include bar
> Class["foo"]->Class["wrapper"]
> Class["bar"]->Class["wrapper"]
> }
>
> But that didn't work for me if I tried to make sure some class is
> executed before the wrapper class. node x { class xyz;
> class["xyz"]->Class["wrapper"] }
>
> Except that I did not try
> Class["foo"]->Class["bar"]->Class["wrapper"]
> in the wrapper class ( because there isn't any relationship between
> foo & bar ). So, maybe I am missing something in your approach ?
his example should work fine
here's a more detailed example with some notifies, i can freely shuffle
my classes around in the chaining and it seems to do the right thing
http://p.devco.net/213/
--
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.
