Add require_epel parameter, defaulting to true
#997
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
bastelfreak
reviewed
May 21, 2024
bastelfreak
reviewed
May 21, 2024
wyardley
force-pushed
the
wyardley/issues_995_alt
branch
from
271d46d to
75a3b55
Compare
|
While it fixes a bug, I guess this is technically an enhancement? |
Allow an option to restore epel as a true soft dependency. Defaulting to `true` so that the tests will work with default behavior. Fixes voxpupuli#995
wyardley
force-pushed
the
wyardley/issues_995_alt
branch
from
75a3b55 to
e71b352
Compare
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Pull Request (PR) description
Allow an option to restore epel as a true soft dependency. Defaulting to
trueso that the tests will work with default behavior.IMO, the safer / better / not technically breaking behavior would be to default this to
false, however I don't think it's possible / trivial to do this while keeping the default class inclusion test inpuppet-rabbitmq/spec/acceptance/class_spec.rb
Line 18 in 137edee
as-is? If we want to try instantiating it differently there, I can rework this or open a new one.
Since there wasn't already a unit test for this, I didn't add one here, but can do so if needed depending on which option we go with.
This Pull Request (PR) fixes the following issues
Fixes #995
Closes #998