Open bittner opened 7 years ago
Ah, the "problem" only is that the directory containing the repository is called puppet-software
instead of just the module name, software
. This is natural when you do a simple clone with Git.
How do other repos deal with this? In the end, it's a sensible choice to prefix a Puppet module's repo name with puppet-
.
The default rake task runs all the tests, including puppet-lint: https://github.com/edestecd/puppet-software/blob/master/Rakefile#L29
I usually just run: rake
that sets up everything. Most modules use rake tasks to run the tests with travis ci
There are some comments on your repo from a Puppet Labs employee. https://github.com/puppetlabs/pdk/issues/254#issuecomment-328801239
You may want to check that. (I'm not proficient and fluent in Ruby to be able to judge this properly.)
@bittner OK, I was not aware of pdk. I'll check it out. This module could definitely use some love and updating. I still have yet to switch over to some puppet 4 conventions. It is compatible but puppet 4 throws some warnings. It is my intention to go through it and get it updated to the latest standards in the near future. I was going to compare to one of the puppetlabs modules as an example... I'll def have a look at making it compatable with pdk.
Don't worry! PDK has been released just recently. It's the new kid on the block.
This could likely be fixed by PR #15.
For some reason
puppet-lint
complains that literally all the (sub)modules are somewhat broken:There's probably a sane reason for
puppet-lint
complaining. On the other hand the wholesoftware
module works just fine in the field out there.Can we fix this, or silence the complaint without running risk?