On 05/25/2016 05:58 AM, Eystein Måløy Stenberg wrote: > I think skipping promises with unexpanded variables is a safe and simple > approach. > > I have seen too many issues with configurations (and thus services) > being broken due to a variables not expanded for some reason. It is > better to leave old and working configurations in this case. > > Unexpanded variables is a bug (either CFEngine or policy) and I don't > think we should proceed, but flag the given promise as not kept.
Generally I think this would be a better user experience if we consistently skipped actuating promises with unresolved variables. My biggest concern is backwards compatibility. Secondarily to that its the edge cases of wanting to have specific content somewhere that looks like a cfengine variable. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "dev-cfengine" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/dev-cfengine/5745BCFB.9030303%40cfenigne.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
