Puppet users - Nov 2012 - How to share a ruby hash between Puppet and standard ruby script?

I have a hash defined containing some static information. This exists 
within a custom function for Puppet.

I wish to share this code with a ruby test harness I''m writing; there
will
be additional resources that both Puppet and the test harness can make use 
of.

My question is - what''s the best way to achieve this?

I''ve seen in custom function examples that require statements are
specified
outside the puppet custom function template. However, if I try to move my 
static hash definition to this scope then it''s no longer visible to the
custom function.

How may I access static info like this from standard ruby, and what scope 
in the puppet custom function definition should it occupy?

Thank you for your time.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/VV5Qh0XEuDIJ.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 4:30 AM, KomodoDave <dave.brown@ocado.com>
wrote:
> I have a hash defined containing some static information. This exists
within
> a custom function for Puppet.
>
> I wish to share this code with a ruby test harness I''m writing;
there will
> be additional resources that both Puppet and the test harness can make use
> of.
>
> My question is - what''s the best way to achieve this?
>
> I''ve seen in custom function examples that require statements are
specified
> outside the puppet custom function template. However, if I try to move my
> static hash definition to this scope then it''s no longer visible
to the
> custom function.
>
> How may I access static info like this from standard ruby, and what scope
in
> the puppet custom function definition should it occupy?
>
> Thank you for your time.
I''d factor out the static information into a class that both the
function and the test harness are able to instantiate.  Do you have
your code published somewhere we could comment on it?  This might make
it easier to make a suggestion.

-Jeff

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

Sure thing, here you are:

## Usage:##   artifacts()## Returns:##   Puppet hash containing
artifact info.## @author N David Brownmodule Puppet::Parser::Functions
    newfunction(:artifacts, :type => :rvalue) do |args|
        # Info common to all artifacts.
        _common = {
            ''pkg''   => ''tar.gz'',
            ''ver''   => ''7.1.0.fuse-041'',
            ''repo''  =>
''http://maven/nexus/content/groups/fusesource-features-group''
        }

        # Bespoke info for artifacts.
        _artifacts = {
            ''fabric'' => {
                ''id''    => ''fuse-fabric'',
                ''grp''   =>
''org.fusesource.fabric''
            }.merge!(_common), # merge in common artifact info
            ''fmc'' => {
                ''id''    => ''fmc-distro'',
                ''grp''   =>
''org.fusesource.fmc''
            }.merge!(_common) # merge in common artifact info
        }

        return _artifacts
    endend

Earlier I was pointing out that moving _common and _artifacts above the
module... line means they can''t be accessed by the new function
definition.

I thought that might work to make them accessible from a require in a
standard Ruby file, having seen require be used at that scope in example
Puppet custom functions in the official documentation.

Cheers,

Dave
-- N David Brown | Software Developer | Development Support and Integration
Team | Ocado Ltd | T: 01707 382197 | M: 07908 623472



On 30 November 2012 16:15, Jeff McCune <jeff@puppetlabs.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 4:30 AM, KomodoDave <dave.brown@ocado.com>
wrote:
> > I have a hash defined containing some static information. This exists
> within
> > a custom function for Puppet.
> >
> > I wish to share this code with a ruby test harness I''m
writing; there
> will
> > be additional resources that both Puppet and the test harness can make
> use
> > of.
> >
> > My question is - what''s the best way to achieve this?
> >
> > I''ve seen in custom function examples that require statements
are
> specified
> > outside the puppet custom function template. However, if I try to move
my
> > static hash definition to this scope then it''s no longer
visible to the
> > custom function.
> >
> > How may I access static info like this from standard ruby, and what
> scope in
> > the puppet custom function definition should it occupy?
> >
> > Thank you for your time.
>
> I''d factor out the static information into a class that both the
> function and the test harness are able to instantiate.  Do you have
> your code published somewhere we could comment on it?  This might make
> it easier to make a suggestion.
>
> -Jeff
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Puppet Users" group.
> To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
>
>
This message has been checked for all known viruses by the Postini Virus Control
Centre.

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

On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 8:42 AM, Dave Brown <dave.brown@ocado.com>
wrote:
> Sure thing, here you are:
This conversation might be better suited to the puppet-dev mailing
list.  I recommend posting follow up messages there.  _common and
_artifacts are local variables and won''t be accessible outside of the
scope they''re defined in.  I recommend turning the data structures
into constants or methods.

Hope this helps,
-Jeff

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