Discussion: use class instead of exec for notification

[faxm0dem]

I think it would make more sense to use this module like this:

file { '/lib/systemd/system/my.service':
   [...]
} ~> Class[Systemd::DaemonReload]

Reasons I can think of:

• make code be easier to modify without changing interface
• make code more portable: one dist may need executing something, the other noop

[johnny5v]

Using class makes more sense. Agree .

[felixb]

👍

[faxm0dem]

Should we use a define or a class?
Which would make more sense (see also #5)

[faxm0dem]

After discussing this with @Volcane on IRC, it came out that it would probably make sense to go further with the abstraction, and to provide a systemd::unit defined type which would take care of everything.

[felixb]

@faxm0dem I've created a proposal PR for this already in #4.

[raphink]

#4 has been merged. I see from #5 that there was a suggestion still to use defines to avoid the problems described by @roidelapluie. Is that still a plan?

[reenberg]

Am I wrong in saying that this and #5 can be closed as this was implemented using a class in #18?

[faxm0dem]

I agree, thanks for noting this!