I'm torn. While the duplication of resources across modules is a huge issue, I'm not sure I'd be comfortable with opening this particular box of Pandora's.
Imagining a world where users can (and will, trust me) declare the same resource all over the place, I see much potential for bugs, unintended behavior and strange edge cases. I have no idea how to safely explore that brave new world (if indeed it comes to pass), but I'd feel safer with the addition of John's constraints, honestly. Pardon the ominous rambling, Felix On 04/01/2014 11:37 PM, Henrik Lindberg wrote: > One major problem is containment, if something is declared more than > once, and with different constraints, that needs to be recorded > somewhere - the 3x catalog format does not lend itself easily to > something like that. In the first cut of the 4x catalog model we added > the idea of a proxy resource; if the same resource is required from more > than one place, those places become proxies for the resource that has > the aggregated constraints. > > We have not yet drilled any deeper into how the constraints work, what > is considered compatible etc. > > When we get to it, there are lots of things to deal with wrt. > containment and dependencies of the proxies (dependencies needs to also > be joined, and may need to propagate to their containers, etc. We will > probably start with solving those issues (with the idea that there is at > least one set of compatibility when resources are identical which gives > us a starting point. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/533BC1B3.3030508%40alumni.tu-berlin.de. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
