Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

issue with "Do not use 'handle' and 'handlers' together. Your 'handle' value has been overridden with 'handlers'" #391

Closed
ghost opened this issue Jul 27, 2015 · 6 comments

Comments

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Jul 27, 2015

In a nutshell - this doesn't make sens(u)e to me -- why was it added to say that if you have handlers, you can't diable the handling of a check? I think it was added on commit #a9b4089cb3ff7ae28a56b8d6d535478953c8f6b8 but i don't agree with it. I should accept whatever i tell it to do, and not impose a logic block - at least remove the 'return' there, and issue the warning for 'style' points or something.

https://github.com/sensu/sensu-puppet/blob/master/lib/puppet/provider/sensu_check/json.rb#L179

@jlambert121
Copy link
Contributor

@countryHick I think this is because the handle attribute used to be used for "handler", but I could be mistaken - it's been a while. A PR is likely warranted with an update to fix this.

@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Jul 30, 2015

yeah - i'll make one later today methinks -- i've locally done this and works much better, cause now you can handle:false, aggregate:true - and your failed aggregates aren't alerting anymore :)

@jlambert121
Copy link
Contributor

@countryHick I'm going to try to tag a 2.0 version of this module hopefully later this week. Do you have a few minutes to do a PR for this? I think a 2.0 version is the perfect time to correct this.

@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Sep 1, 2015

hopefully - i'll try for today/tonight...

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Justin Lambert [email protected]
wrote:

@countryHick https://github.com/countryHick I'm going to try to tag a
2.0 version of this module hopefully later this week. Do you have a few
minutes to do a PR for this? I think a 2.0 version is the perfect time to
correct this.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#391 (comment).

@jlambert121
Copy link
Contributor

@countryHick Does #422 work for you? I want to close this one out and then am going to tag a 2.0 release finally.

@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Sep 14, 2015

Yep - that's the one

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant