PSDscResources
PSDscResources copied to clipboard
WindowsFeature: added Source parameter
Pull Request (PR) description
This PR adds the Source parameter back to the WindowsFeature-Ressource. This is needed for the installation of certain features, as example the .NET Framework 3.5 Features on Windows Server 2016.
This Pull Request (PR) fixes the following issues
-Fixes #150
Task list
- [x] Added an entry under the Unreleased section in the CHANGELOG.md. Entry should say what was changed, and how that affects users (if applicable).
- [x] Resource documentation added/updated in README.md.
- [x] Resource parameter descriptions added/updated in README.md, schema.mof and comment-based help.
- [x] Comment-based help added/updated.
- [ ] Localization strings added/updated in all localization files as appropriate.
- [x] Examples appropriately added/updated.
- [ ] Unit tests added/updated. See DSC Resource Testing Guidelines.
- [ ] Integration tests added/updated (where possible). See DSC Resource Testing Guidelines.
- [x] New/changed code adheres to DSC Resource Style Guidelines and Best Practices.
Codecov Report
Merging #169 into dev will decrease coverage by
<1%. The diff coverage is50%.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## dev #169 +/- ##
===================================
- Coverage 83% 83% -1%
===================================
Files 19 19
Lines 2760 2762 +2
Branches 4 4
===================================
+ Hits 2303 2304 +1
- Misses 453 454 +1
Partials 4 4
Thanks @machgo for the added feature. In theory we don't make much feature update or improvements to this module, as this is the supported replacement for in-box resources (so new features risks introducing new bugs, and the module HAS to be a like for like replacement).
In your case, the lack of tests might also be an issue, but the signature of the resource is backward compatible (no added key or mandatory parameter, not removed/renamed parameter).
While I double check with @kwirkykat, @mgreenegit or @mbreakey3 whether they want to accept this change, I'd recommend you open a similar PR to xPSDesiredStateConfiguration which would more easily bring such changes in.
Hi @gaelcolas - did you get a chance to check with @mbreakey3 or @mgreenegit on whether we wanted to include this one?