[dev.icinga.com #12962] Allow for dots in datafield/varname definitions

[icinga-migration]

This issue has been migrated from Redmine: https://dev.icinga.com/issues/12962

Created by tgelf on 2016-10-24 04:33:10 +00:00

Assignee: tgelf
Status: Resolved (closed on 2016-11-08 01:05:04 +00:00)
Target Version: 1.3.0
Last Update: 2016-11-08 01:05:04 +00:00 (in Redmine)

---

One might want to use upcoming nested data types for this. While dots in varnames works in various places (Imports/Sync, CLI) allowing them in varnames is misleading as we could hardly provide what they suggest. When you want to have structured data types you mast define their structure.

Changesets

2016-11-08 01:00:38 +00:00 by tgelf 63bf607

IcingaObjectFieldLoader: allow exotic var names

fixes #12094
fixes #12962

---

Relations:

• relates #12086

[icinga-migration]

Updated by tgelf on 2016-10-24 04:33:28 +00:00

• Relates set to 12086

[icinga-migration]

Updated by tgelf on 2016-11-03 12:39:28 +00:00

• Target Version changed from 1.2.0 to 1.3.0

[icinga-migration]

Updated by tgelf on 2016-11-08 00:50:47 +00:00

• Subject changed from Do not allow for dots in datafield/varname definitions to Allow for dots in datafield/varname definitions
• Status changed from New to Assigned
• Assigned to set to tgelf

Changed my mind on this. Dots are valid in variable names, so we should support them. Should have no influence on vars.some.thing, as this differs from vars["some.thing"]. I want my config to render as follows, with all the web forms allowing me to do so:

object Host "router.example.com" {
    import "Default Host"

    address = "192.0.2.10"
    groups = [ "router" ]
    vars["a.b.c"] = "test"
    vars.location = "nuremberg"
}

[icinga-migration]

Updated by tgelf on 2016-11-08 01:05:04 +00:00

• Status changed from Assigned to Resolved
• Done % changed from 0 to 100

Applied in changeset 63bf607.