support arbitary mountpoints for puppet url's

[JonathonAnderson]

I tested the regex's against these values

• puppet:///modules/modulename/file
• puppet:///othermount/file
• puppet:///othermount/path/file
• puppet:///modules/filename
• puppet:///filename

I'm not familiar with RSPEC, so I tried to follow the structure of what was there

[JonathonAnderson]

the regex also checks out for

• puppet://server/modules/modulename/file
• puppet://server/othermount/file
• puppet://server/othermount/path/file
• puppet://server/modules/filename
• puppet://server/filename

[JonathonAnderson]

This pull request was based off an issue in the original repo owned by rodjek, and satisfies the objectives they intended for that issue rodjek#568

There is some discussion of the change in an issue they mention in the description

[binford2k]

Also see conversation at https://puppetcommunity.slack.com/archives/C0W298S9G/p1634939379045200

[JonathonAnderson]

Changing the plugin name (I forgot to change the filename BTW) was a bad assumption on my part. If that's the breaking change, then I don't think that would be necessary.

The plugin still validates that a puppet:/// URL follows the correct structure when referencing modules, it just relaxes the standard to not flag arbitrary mountpoints, so this change will still honor the semantics of the module as it's titled.

[binford2k]

I don't think I'm a fan of changing this particular check like @rnelson0 suggests. But if you created a second check with this functionality, I'd be 👍 for it.

[JonathonAnderson]

@binford2k can you point me in the right direction where those modifications need to be made? I have no familiarity with the code base, and the pull request you see is literally the first ruby I've edited. I can pick up on the layout of the code and make similarly small changes within an already well defined structure. If it requires a large project, I might not be your guy in the short term

[binford2k]

Moving the files after your change to new filenames and then restoring the original files unchanged would go a long way.

[chelnak]

I'm going to close this PR given that there have been some significant changes to the code and there was no response to the last comment.

We really appreciate your contribution & if you would still like to see these changes in puppet-line, please do raise another PR.