Puppet users - Oct 2006 - puppet 0.20.0: updated language syntax doesn''t work?

Hi,

I just upgraded to puppet 0.20.0 today after a short time playing with
0.19.3. The docs say to use the uppercase form for types but that
seems to break for me. When I updated the remotefile function to use
the new way, the puppet clients complain about objects not being
found. For example:

----- OLD WAY (works, just with deprecations) -----

define remotefile (...) {
    file { $name :
        owner => $owner,
        source => "puppet://$server/$source"
    }
}

----- NEW WAY (doesn''t work) -----

define remotefile (...) {
    File[$name] {
        owner => $owner,
        source => "puppet://$server/$source"
    }
}

----- CALLING CLASS

remotefile { "/data/config/app1/test.cfg":
    mode => "0644",
    source => "prod/app1/config/test.cfg"
}

remotefile { "/data/config/app2/prod.cfg":
    mode => "0644",
    source => "prod/app2/config/prod.cfg"
}

The error message when using the above results in:

Could not find object(s) file[/data/config/app1/test.cfg],
file[/data/config/app2/prod.cfg]

Advice would be appreciated. :-)

Thanks!

- gino ledesma

Gino LV. Ledesma wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I just upgraded to puppet 0.20.0 today after a short time playing with
> 0.19.3. The docs say to use the uppercase form for types but that
> seems to break for me. When I updated the remotefile function to use
> the new way, the puppet clients complain about objects not being
> found. For example:
Hmm, I must have poorly documented this.

The syntax has only changed for overriding resources, not for initially 
specifying them.  That is, the initial specification of a resource looks 
exactly the same.

In versions prior to 0.20, the same syntax was used to initialize and 
override resources; 0.20 adds a new syntax (the one you use below) to 
distinguish overriding a resource from specifying it.

Thus, you should not modify your remotefile definition at all.

Is that clear enough?

I''m working on the docs right now, trying to build a more complete 
language tutorial, and I''ll do my best to make sure this is clear.

By the way, if someone is looking for a way to get involved in Puppet 
but does not feel up to contributing code, we could *really* use a doc 
wrangler.  Ben Kite has done well at adding and updating documentation 
recently, but in looking over what we have right now, much of it is 
woefully out of date and we don''t have nearly the functional coverage
we
need.

-- 
Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra and then suddenly it
flips over, pinning you underneath. At night, the ice weasels come.
               --Matt Groening
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Luke Kanies | http://reductivelabs.com | http://madstop.com

On 10/23/06, Luke Kanies <luke@madstop.com> wrote:
> Gino LV. Ledesma wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I just upgraded to puppet 0.20.0 today after a short time playing with
> > 0.19.3. The docs say to use the uppercase form for types but that
> > seems to break for me. When I updated the remotefile function to use
> > the new way, the puppet clients complain about objects not being
> > found. For example:
>
> Hmm, I must have poorly documented this.
>
> The syntax has only changed for overriding resources, not for initially
> specifying them.  That is, the initial specification of a resource looks
> exactly the same.
>
> In versions prior to 0.20, the same syntax was used to initialize and
> override resources; 0.20 adds a new syntax (the one you use below) to
> distinguish overriding a resource from specifying it.
>
> Thus, you should not modify your remotefile definition at all.
>
> Is that clear enough?
Ok, thanks, that makes things a bit clearer.
> I''m working on the docs right now, trying to build a more complete
> language tutorial, and I''ll do my best to make sure this is clear.
>
> By the way, if someone is looking for a way to get involved in Puppet
> but does not feel up to contributing code, we could *really* use a doc
> wrangler.  Ben Kite has done well at adding and updating documentation
> recently, but in looking over what we have right now, much of it is
> woefully out of date and we don''t have nearly the functional
coverage we
> need.
>
I''d be willing to help out in documentation. Are you planning to do
this on the existing wiki?

Thanks!

- gino

Gino LV. Ledesma wrote:
> 
> Ok, thanks, that makes things a bit clearer.
Great.
> I''d be willing to help out in documentation. Are you planning to
do
> this on the existing wiki?
At this point, all of the documentation is maintained in svn in the 
documentation/ subdirectory (via  quirk of the web site structure, most 
of it is in documentation/documentation).

I''d be willing to move the docs to a wiki if someone can recommend a 
wiki that supports markdown (Puppet''s generated docs are in it) and one
that makes it easy to export information.  I''m unwilling to tie these 
files up in a way that I can''t easily extract.

-- 
I have lost friends, some by death... others through sheer inability to
cross the street.     -- Virginia Woolf
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Luke Kanies | http://reductivelabs.com | http://madstop.com

Hi Luke

On Oct 23, 2006, at 23:08, Luke Kanies wrote:
> By the way, if someone is looking for a way to get involved in Puppet
> but does not feel up to contributing code, we could *really* use a doc
> wrangler.  Ben Kite has done well at adding and updating documentation
> recently, but in looking over what we have right now, much of it is
> woefully out of date and we don''t have nearly the functional  
> coverage we
> need.
Well, I''d like to help with the documentation if I can. Wrote a lot  
in SGML for the last company I worked for...

--
Med venlig hilsen
Juri Rischel Jensen

Fab:IT ApS
Vesterbrogade 50
DK-1620 København
Tlf: 70 202 407 / Fax: 33 313 640
www.fab-it.dk / juri@fab-it.dk

On Tuesday 24 October 2006 17:33, Luke Kanies wrote:
> I''d be willing to move the docs to a wiki if someone can recommend
a
> wiki that supports markdown (Puppet''s generated docs are in it)
and one
> that makes it easy to export information.  I''m unwilling to tie
these
> files up in a way that I can''t easily extract.
You might want to take a look at ikiwiki:

http://ikiwiki.kitenet.net/features.html

This is a "wiki compiler" reading markdown, with SVN integration, CGI
and a
plugin system. 


Regards, David
-- 
- hallo... wie gehts heute?
- *hust* gut *rotz* *keuch*
- gott sei dank kommunizieren wir über ein septisches medium ;)
 -- Matthias Leeb, Uni f. angewandte Kunst, 2005-02-15


_______________________________________________
Puppet-users mailing list
Puppet-users@madstop.com
https://mail.madstop.com/mailman/listinfo/puppet-users

David Schmitt wrote:
> On Tuesday 24 October 2006 17:33, Luke Kanies wrote:
>> I''d be willing to move the docs to a wiki if someone can
recommend a
>> wiki that supports markdown (Puppet''s generated docs are in
it) and one
>> that makes it easy to export information.  I''m unwilling to
tie these
>> files up in a way that I can''t easily extract.
> 
> You might want to take a look at ikiwiki:
> 
> http://ikiwiki.kitenet.net/features.html
> 
> This is a "wiki compiler" reading markdown, with SVN integration,
CGI and a
> plugin system. 
This is awesome, it''s exactly what I was looking for.  I wish
I''d known
about it before I started using MoinMoin.

It doesn''t seem quite as full-featured as MoinMoin, or at least its 
default stylesheet is insanely plain, but I love the ability to get at 
the whole site via subversion.

Thanks!

-- 
Always read stuff that will make you look good if you die in the middle
of it.       -- P. J. O''Rourke
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Luke Kanies | http://reductivelabs.com | http://madstop.com

Juri Rischel Jensen wrote:
> 
> Well, I''d like to help with the documentation if I can. Wrote a
lot
> in SGML for the last company I worked for...
How would you like to contribute?

At this point, all of the docs are in Markdown[1], and they''re all 
either in subversion in the documentation/ subdirectory, or they''re in 
subversion in the code files and are generated from there.

I''d like to find a way to make it possible to edit the docs either on 
the web site or in subversion (and David Schmidt''s link to ikiwiki 
should help with that), but for now you have to write them in Subversion.

At first, I''d prefer to accept patches to the svn docs, just like
you''d
send a patch to code, but once you''ve submitted a couple of good 
patches, I''d be glad to give you write access to the repo.

1 - http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/

-- 
Always read stuff that will make you look good if you die in the middle
of it.       -- P. J. O''Rourke
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Luke Kanies | http://reductivelabs.com | http://madstop.com

2006/10/27, Luke Kanies <luke@madstop.com>:
>
> David Schmitt wrote:
> > On Tuesday 24 October 2006 17:33, Luke Kanies wrote:
> >> I''d be willing to move the docs to a wiki if someone can
recommend a
> >> wiki that supports markdown (Puppet''s generated docs are
in it) and one
> >> that makes it easy to export information.  I''m unwilling
to tie these
> >> files up in a way that I can''t easily extract.
> >
> > You might want to take a look at ikiwiki:
> >
> > http://ikiwiki.kitenet.net/features.html
> >
> > This is a "wiki compiler" reading markdown, with SVN
integration, CGI
> and a
> > plugin system.
>
> This is awesome, it''s exactly what I was looking for.  I wish
I''d known
> about it before I started using MoinMoin.
>
> It doesn''t seem quite as full-featured as MoinMoin, or at least
its
> default stylesheet is insanely plain, but I love the ability to get at
> the whole site via subversion.
>
> Thanks!
>
Just in case you still haven''t made up your mind... I found this:
http://www.wikimatrix.org/

Best regards
Jose


_______________________________________________
Puppet-users mailing list
Puppet-users@madstop.com
https://mail.madstop.com/mailman/listinfo/puppet-users