Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
Message from discussion Oh, code, where art thou? -- Fixing #7316
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Andy Parker  
View profile  
 More options Nov 15 2012, 4:16 pm
From: Andy Parker <a...@puppetlabs.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 13:16:00 -0800
Subject: Re: [Puppet-dev] Oh, code, where art thou? -- Fixing #7316

I just noticed that there is a puppet/application/resource.rb and a
puppet/face/resource.rb. I don't think the face is actually accessible from
the command line.

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Andy Parker <a...@puppetlabs.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Daniel Pittman <dan...@puppetlabs.com>wrote:

>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Andy Parker <a...@puppetlabs.com> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:46 AM, Jeff McCune <j...@puppetlabs.com>
>> wrote:

>> >> Does this still leave us in the difficult situation where the Faces
>> >> application file itself lives along the modulepath, so we use one
>> >> configuration file section to determine the module path, then the mode
>> >> (section) changes out from underneath us, and we use another section
>> >> to resolve the rest of the settings?  How would a new action
>> >> augmenting the `puppet module` application behave in this situation?

>> > Yeah, we are still in that situation. The settings that are seen during
>> the
>> > run are not necessarily in line with what was used during application
>> > discover. There is actually even a slightly larger issue: the modulepath
>> > during discovery is being added to the ruby LOAD_PATH so that utility
>> code
>> > can be loaded. This means that it may end up with things that it maybe
>> > "shouldn't" have access to because it started with one modulepath and
>> then
>> > wanted to run in "master" mode to get a different modulepath. I don't
>> think
>> > this is a problem for any existing applications, though, since I'm
>> special
>> > casing master and agent to start in the current manner.

>> At least `puppet resource` and `apply` probably depend on the same
>> run_mode vs LOAD_PATH thing, because they interact directly with the
>> type and provider system.  Ditto the resource face.

> I just looked into the code and neither one of those looks like they try
> to change run_mode, which means they would just run with the default "user"
> settings. This should continue to "just work" with the proposed change.

>> --
>> Daniel Pittman
>> ⎋ Puppet Labs Developer – http://puppetlabs.com
>> ♲ Made with 100 percent post-consumer electrons

>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Puppet Developers" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to puppet-dev@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> puppet-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.