Re: Template Nodes considered harmful

--On Wednesday, October 24, 2007 12:23 PM -0500 Luke Kanies 
<luke@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> Yeah, more likely, there should be a class called webserver that
>> would be
>> inherited or included as needed per node.  The whole template thing
>> didn't
>> pan out like we thought it would.
>
> 'webserver' is more of a canonical class, so it doesn't make sense to
> talk about a node inheriting from it -- the node isn't usually going
> to change anything about the behaviour of the webserver class.
>
> I usually draw the line like this:  If you're only including classes
> and setting variables, then you've got a node; if you're defining
> resources, then you've got a class.
>
> I know it's not a hard line, but that's the way it is.

Right.  I meant that a class would inherit webserver and modify it or you 
could just include the class in the node if it was fine as is.  I think 
we're on the same page on this.