Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Puppet 3 scoping question

2014-11-10 Thread jcbollinger
On Friday, November 7, 2014 11:39:53 AM UTC-6, Felix.Frank wrote: > > On 11/07/2014 03:40 PM, jcbollinger wrote: > > If you need to support multiple some::fun_instances, with some but not > > all sharing any given $sname (i.e. a many to many relationship), then > > you're going to need to make

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Puppet 3 scoping question

2014-11-07 Thread Felix Frank
On 11/07/2014 07:40 PM, Bill MacAllister wrote: >> >> define something::specific($group) { >> file { "/things/$group/$name": } >> if !defined( File["/things/$group"] ) { >> file { "/things/$group": ensure => directory } >> } >> } > > Yes, I like that. Let me know when I can us

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Puppet 3 scoping question

2014-11-07 Thread Bill MacAllister
--On Friday, November 07, 2014 06:39:41 PM +0100 Felix Frank wrote: On 11/07/2014 03:40 PM, jcbollinger wrote: If you need to support multiple some::fun_instances, with some but not all sharing any given $sname (i.e. a many to many relationship), then you're going to need to make deeper cha

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Puppet 3 scoping question

2014-11-07 Thread Felix Frank
On 11/07/2014 03:40 PM, jcbollinger wrote: > If you need to support multiple some::fun_instances, with some but not > all sharing any given $sname (i.e. a many to many relationship), then > you're going to need to make deeper changes. Yeah. FWIW, this is the one use case that worries me most when

[Puppet Users] Re: Puppet 3 scoping question

2014-11-07 Thread jcbollinger
On Thursday, November 6, 2014 8:30:16 PM UTC-6, w...@stanford.edu wrote: > > In puppet 2.7 we use the following construct. > > define some::fun( > ensure => present, > sname => 'some.server.com' > This isn't the source of your problem, but do be aware that setting default parameter values