Re: [Puppet Users] right way to multiuser development

2011-12-23 Thread Andreas Rogge
Am 23.12.2011 09:00, schrieb Alexey Wasilyev: How do you solve such problems? We do development on every developer's workstation. Everyone has his own puppetmaster and can use VMs to test wether his modules work or not. The modules are then checked into SVN which triggers the production puppet

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: RFC: Splitting up the file{} type functionality.

2011-04-04 Thread Andreas Rogge
Am 31.03.2011 16:56, schrieb jcbollinger: 3. Sockets, FIFOs, devices, whatnot [...] Indeed. And here, too, you might want to work in symlinks to these objects, especially if symlinks managed by the regular file type (2 above) indeed require their target to be a regular file.. Yes, of course.

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: RFC: Splitting up the file{} type functionality.

2011-03-30 Thread Andreas Rogge
Am 29.03.2011 18:02, schrieb Nigel Kersten: On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 8:16 AM, Joe McDonagh wrote: I'd really prefer if the name of this resource didn't change. I understand there are problems but can't you just split the code and have different behavior based on something like filetype =>?

[Puppet Users] Re: Facter - the future - your input needed

2009-02-18 Thread Andreas Rogge
Am Donnerstag, den 05.02.2009, 00:08 -0600 schrieb Luke Kanies: > On Jan 30, 2009, at 6:10 AM, Mike Pountney wrote: > > > I like this idea, but how would it work in both facter output (would > > it force us to use a rich output format for instance?) and puppet > > itself? > > This is still undeci