User story #3490: Adapt the generic package_method from the cfengine_stdlib with individual package_changes - Rudder - Issue Tracker

Actions

Copy link

User story #3490

closed

Adapt the generic package_method from the cfengine_stdlib with individual package_changes

Added by Nicolas CHARLES almost 11 years ago. Updated almost 6 years ago.

Status:

Rejected

Priority:

Assignee:

Category:

System techniques

Target version:

Ideas (not version specific)

Pull Request:

https://github.com/Normation/rudder-t...

UX impact:

Suggestion strength:

User visibility:

Effort required:

Name check:

Fix check:

Regression:

Description

All is in the title

Related issues 1 (0 open — 1 closed)

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Nicolas CHARLES almost 11 years ago

Status changed from In progress to Pending technical review
Assignee changed from Nicolas CHARLES to Jonathan CLARKE
Pull Request set to https://github.com/Normation/rudder-techniques/pull/95

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Jonathan CLARKE almost 11 years ago

Status changed from Pending technical review to Discussion
Target version changed from 2.5.3 to 2.7.0~beta1

I've looked at this Pull Request, and I see that it adds a rudder_generic package_method to our stdlib (by the way, I think this would be better named generic_individual, so then we could contribute it back to CFEngine).

However, at the moment, the Pull Request just adds this body, but never uses it. I think you should rework all the Techniques that use local package_methods to use this one instead. In the mean time, I'd rather not merge a commit that adds code that's not used, seeing as we are trying to stabilize the code currently.

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Nicolas PERRON almost 11 years ago

Target version changed from 2.7.0~beta1 to 2.7.0~rc1

Any news for this issue ?

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Nicolas PERRON over 10 years ago

Status changed from Discussion to 8
Target version changed from 2.7.0~rc1 to Ideas (not version specific)

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Jonathan CLARKE over 10 years ago

Assignee changed from Jonathan CLARKE to Nicolas PERRON

NicoC, what did you think about my feedback on this? I'd like to at least see the name of the body changed, and hopefully actually use it from Techniques too.

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Jonathan CLARKE over 10 years ago

Assignee changed from Nicolas PERRON to Nicolas CHARLES

Oops, wrong Nico.

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Jonathan CLARKE over 10 years ago

Nicolas, this is blocking #3855 - can you provide an updated Pull Request or should we get someone else to work on this?

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Nicolas CHARLES over 10 years ago

Status changed from 8 to Discussion
Assignee changed from Nicolas CHARLES to Jonathan CLARKE

Ha, sorry i didn't see the feedback
I was more planning to do it as a two way upgrade:
- create the body
- only then create new versions of techniques using it

otherwise the PR might get huge, and desynced with new versions of Technique coming up

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Jonathan CLARKE over 10 years ago

Assignee changed from Jonathan CLARKE to Nicolas CHARLES

As discussed:

There is no point introducing a body package_method if we're not going to use it
What is pressing here is getting a central package_method to fix bugs in, in particular for bug #3855. So, let's start by creating the central package_method, and using it in the rpmPackageInstallation and aptPackageInstallation techniques.

Go go go!

Actions

Copy link

#10

Updated by Jonathan CLARKE over 10 years ago

We also noted that to start work on the rpmPackageInstallation Technique, these bugs need to be fixed first, to start work on a decent, clean, working base: #3964 and #3965.

Actions

Copy link

#11

Updated by Jonathan CLARKE over 10 years ago

Jonathan CLARKE wrote:

We also noted that to start work on the rpmPackageInstallation Technique, these bugs need to be fixed first, to start work on a decent, clean, working base: #3964 and #3965.

And also #3983.

Actions

Copy link

#12