Open Stack

On 08/13/2015 08:19 PM, Darragh Bailey wrote:
> macros do not get substitution performed unless you provide a
> variable to be substituted in.

Thanks; that makes some sense when you grok what's going on,
especially as to why job-templates require it but other macros don't.

I have proposed [1] to better document the situation as it stands.

> I wonder if jinja templating would avoid some of the quirks we run
> into around using python's string formatting for substitution?


So I feel like jjb could probably do better even given the status-quo
-- if it bailed on missing parameters to shell-builders (or, always
expanded -- in essence the same thing), then we would *always* just
put "${{FOO}}" when we want "${FOO}" in the output.

As it stands, sometimes we take the "short-cut" of letting no
parameters represent "pass-through" -- but that leads to the rather
confusing inconsistency we have now.

I proposed [2]; jjb is more complex than I expected (duh!) so
interested if it can be made to work.

-i

[1] https://review.openstack.org/212952
[2] https://review.openstack.org/212980