Re: (no subject)

[Mark . Burgess]

I think that this was a good idea, but did not have time to look at
it in 2.0.4. I'll be coming back to this

M

On 16 Sep, Thomas.Lemm@gmx.de wrote:
> Hi all!
> 
> I am very interested in an enhancement proposed some time ago by Paul
> Paradise on 08/09/02. I would like to see a better module driven macro and 
> class
> definition in cfengine. As up to now classes and macros (variables) being
> defined in the control: section are better integrated than those defined by
> modules. (See my example posted in bug-cfengine). There seems to be a patch
> somewhere for pre control section module execution. 
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> Thomas
> 
> Quote from Paul Paradies on 08/09/02:
>> Chris Chapin (whom I work with here, and has also posted - consult the
>> archive) has written a patch (submitted to Mark, I believe) that adds
>> a modules: top-level directive that parses the modules in time to make
>> them work without using AddInstallable. We felt it was a bug that
>> modules didn't appear in time for imports and the like, tweaked the
>> execution order to allow something like ...
> 
> 



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Work: +47 22453272            Email:  Mark.Burgess@iu.hio.no
Fax : +47 22453205            WWW  :  http://www.iu.hio.no/~mark
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~