Open Stack

>
> I've been mulling this over the last several days and I just can't
> accept an entire ruby function which would be ran for every parameter
> with the desired static value of "<SERVICE DEFAULT>" when the class is
> declared and parsed.  I am not generally against using functions as a
> parameter default just not a fan in this case because running ruby just
> to return a static string seems inappropriate and not optimal.
>
> In this specific case I think the params pattern and inheritance can
> obtain us the same goals.  I also find this a valid us of inheritance
> cross module namespaces but...only because all our modules must depend
> on puppet-openstacklib.
>
> http://paste.openstack.org/show/473655
>

Yes after thinking it over, I agree that the function for a parameter
is probably not the best route.  I think going the inheritance route
is a much more established pattern and would make more sense.

Just throwing this out there, another option could be using a fact in
puppet-openstacklib. We could create an os_service_default fact or
something named similarly that would be a static constant that could
be used for a parameter default and we could leverage it as part of
the is_service_default() function.  We would still require
puppet-openstacklib be included but we wouldn't need to do all the
inherits in the classes.  Just a thought.

Thanks,
-Alex


>
>
> --
> Cody
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>