Anyone, I''ve read this doc several times: http://docs.puppetlabs.com/guides/plugins_in_modules.html As a whole, it really doesn''t make sense. It seems pretty obvious it was written by someone with deep knowledge of the subject, but there is little context for someone like me. Is there better documentation somewhere? Doug -- 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 Aug 31, 7:40 pm, Douglas Garstang <doug.garst...@gmail.com> wrote:> Anyone, > > I''ve read this doc several times: > > http://docs.puppetlabs.com/guides/plugins_in_modules.html > > As a whole, it really doesn''t make sense. It seems pretty obvious it was > written by someone with deep knowledge of the subject, but there is little > context for someone like me. Is there better documentation somewhere?I am not aware of better documentation of the topics covered by that guide, but I don''t personally see a need for any, either. Perhaps you are looking for information outside its rather limited scope? In particular, that document is not about *writing* custom types / providers / facts / functions (there are different docs for that); it is only about how to deploy their Ruby code once it is written. If you have specific questions that the doc doesn''t answer for you, then this is a fine place to pose them. You could also consider filing a ticket against the documentation. It is unlikely, however, that such a general complaint as the one above will elicit much help. John -- 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.
For example, the very first sentence on the page starts with: "Learn how to distribute custom facts and types" How about a definition of what a custom fact and type are? Good documentation generally doesn''t assume that the reader knows all the terminology being used without first defining or describing it in some fashion. Doug On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 6:21 AM, jcbollinger <John.Bollinger@stjude.org>wrote:> > > On Aug 31, 7:40 pm, Douglas Garstang <doug.garst...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Anyone, > > > > I''ve read this doc several times: > > > > http://docs.puppetlabs.com/guides/plugins_in_modules.html > > > > As a whole, it really doesn''t make sense. It seems pretty obvious it was > > written by someone with deep knowledge of the subject, but there is > little > > context for someone like me. Is there better documentation somewhere? > > > I am not aware of better documentation of the topics covered by that > guide, but I don''t personally see a need for any, either. Perhaps you > are looking for information outside its rather limited scope? In > particular, that document is not about *writing* custom types / > providers / facts / functions (there are different docs for that); it > is only about how to deploy their Ruby code once it is written. > > If you have specific questions that the doc doesn''t answer for you, > then this is a fine place to pose them. You could also consider > filing a ticket against the documentation. It is unlikely, however, > that such a general complaint as the one above will elicit much help. > > > John > > -- > 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. > >-- Regards, Douglas Garstang http://www.linkedin.com/in/garstang Email: doug.garstang@gmail.com Cell: +1-805-340-5627 -- 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 Sep 1, 11:46 am, Douglas Garstang <doug.garst...@gmail.com> wrote:> For example, the very first sentence on the page starts with: > > "Learn how to distribute custom facts and types" > > How about a definition of what a custom fact and type are? Good > documentation generally doesn''t assume that the reader knows all the > terminology being used without first defining or describing it in some > fashion.You started off complaining about missing context, but that only holds up if you divorce the document from the overall documentation site. No, it is not a standalone document. Your point? Granted, if you hit that document without at least a general idea of Puppet''s nature and structure then it wouldn''t be much use to you. But in that case, briefly defining the terms wouldn''t be much help: if you''re not in altogether the wrong place then you need a much fuller introduction to the subject than is appropriate for such a narrowly scoped document. You are not (yet) among its target audience. But lo and behold! On that page there are links to Puppetlabs product overviews that introduce Puppet in broad terms, and at least four links to the top Puppet documentation, where can be found documents covering these terms and many others in considerable depth. The document in question is itself accessible from there, right next to the documents on writing the various types of plugins, and well below the Language Guide and resource and function references that provide the needed background. The context is all there, so I can only assume you are complaining about the general organization of the documentation site. I am confident that no one at Puppetlabs would claim it''s perfect (nor do I), but "it doesn''t work for me" is not a useful criticism. Do you have a question we can help you with? A suggestion for us to consider? Criticisms veiled as interrogatories need not apply. John -- 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.