diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | doc/forum/REversable_property_changes/comment_5_4b876eae2404ea107ba65a3c879a4c2a._comment | 22 |
1 files changed, 22 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/forum/REversable_property_changes/comment_5_4b876eae2404ea107ba65a3c879a4c2a._comment b/doc/forum/REversable_property_changes/comment_5_4b876eae2404ea107ba65a3c879a4c2a._comment new file mode 100644 index 00000000..7fe0e9fe --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/forum/REversable_property_changes/comment_5_4b876eae2404ea107ba65a3c879a4c2a._comment @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="joey" + subject="""comment 5""" + date="2015-11-13T04:25:47Z" + content=""" +It depends. If it makes sense for your property to remove the software +when it's reverted, then make `installed` revertable like that. + +Maybe that doesn't make sense though, you only want to make sure it's +installed before using it, but you don't necessarily want to remove it just +because this one property that uses it gets reverted. You can express that +this way: + + ((setup `requires` installed) <!> cleanup) + +I do think it was a good change, in propellor 2.13.0, to make "revertable +`requires` nonrevertable" not be a RevertableProperty. Now when we want a +RevertableProperty, we have to think about whether it makes sense to revert +the whole thing or not; before this change we just got back a so-called +RevertableProperty that was not actually fully revertable, and probably +didn't think about it enough. +"""]] |