This is more a question of policy than a technical problem:
So I ran into a behavior of the xIPAddress resource in wave 6 of DSC that I basically consider a bug so I changed it. So now that I'm done with that ... it's a question of whats "proper" in this situation:
Because I modified an existing DSC resource, I get the designation change from "x" to "c"... but where should I put it? Should I just put it back into the existing xNetworking module and let it coexist along side the original? Or is the "correct answer" to create a completely new cNetworking module even though ti will only create the single resource (cIPAddress) that I modified?
To take the question a step further: what about the manifest at the root of the module? Is there a "official method" for giving credit to both Microsoft and myself? Hey MS made 90% of the code so the CompanyName should probably still reflect that ... but I made some actual changes to it so ...
Again this is really "public formality". My resource works but I'm just looking to "follow the rules" and put this resource in the right spot and flag it appropriately. I'm assuming Ill create my own module and give it it's own GUID then just credit MS somewhere.... but wanted my fledgling dive into DSC to at least be as least offensive to the standards gods as possible.
I'd say to first check our DSC Hub – our GitHub may have a newer cIPAddress that you could use as a starting point. That might also offer some hints on how other folks are handling things like attribution.
I've asked the PowerShell team to kindly provide answers to your very good questions and linked to this thread in my comment on the blog post regarding the DSC Resource Kit Wave 6.
I'm hoping the team will provide detailed answers soon on this forum or via a separate blog post on the team blog.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.