-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 43
New issue
Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? # to your account
Cleanup configuration file #340
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Overall I think this makes sense.
@@ -135,7 +134,7 @@ def modules | |||
end | |||
|
|||
def module(name) | |||
modules.find { |m| m.name == name } | |||
modules.find { |m| m.identifier == name } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This looks like a bugfix. Could you provide a bit more info about why it's wrong?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I tried to update the commit message with more information. The most telling is to look at the hook context documentation. Unfortunately, I think name
in some areas of code refers to the Puppet naming scheme with ::
and in other places it references this internal "name" construct that Kafo creates -- https://github.com/theforeman/kafo/blob/master/lib/kafo/puppet_module.rb#L175
The previous implementation relied on the name of the module to be specified which is a specially constructured replacement of colons with underscores. The hook context calls on this method and indicates using the identifier as a typicaly Puppet user would encounter it. For example, my_example::foo would be specified rather than a user thinking to convert this to my_example_foo. Thus this worked for single level classes, this would have failed for multilevel classes.
c85e949
to
6defecf
Compare
@ekohl Could you revisit a review on this? |
No description provided.