Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

BREAKING: Fix and simplify write_network plugin definition #617

Closed

Conversation

carroarmato0
Copy link

@carroarmato0 carroarmato0 commented Jan 2, 2017

The plugin expects a hash to be passed, yet, only the first element is being used.

Means that a lot of redundancy can be removed.

Also fixed an issue with passing the wrong value to ::collectd::plugin::network which expects servers instead of server.

Signed-off-by: Christophe Vanlancker christophe.vanlancker@inuits.eu

Signed-off-by: Christophe Vanlancker <christophe.vanlancker@inuits.eu>
@carroarmato0
Copy link
Author

Hmm, looks like the Rubocop test is complaining. But not sure if my changes have influence on that. I just let it be?

Copy link

@vinzent vinzent left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this introduces a breaking change.

I think the intention was to use create_resources but then only the first entry was used. nowadays one could use puppet4 each loops.

With only one entry it IMHO doesn't make much sens because you can use collectd::plugin::network::server directly without using another wrapper.

regarding the rubocop test error maybe you need a rebase?

@vinzent vinzent changed the title Fix and simplify write_network plugin definition BREAKING: Fix and simplify write_network plugin definition Feb 10, 2017
@bastelfreak
Copy link
Member

Hi @carroarmato0 , thanks for the PR. Can you please rebase it against latest master?

@bastelfreak
Copy link
Member

Hi @carroarmato0, I'm going to close this PR due to inactivity. Feel free to reopen it if you're still interested in it.

@bastelfreak bastelfreak closed this Mar 6, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants