feat: add a parameter to define if we manage nfs server service ensure state

[ttousai]

We want puppet-nfs to manage the NFS service but not manage the service state (running/stopped) because that state is managed by another tool.

[TheMeier]

That sounds like an anti pattern to me. No 2 tools should manage the same resource

[tuxmea]

Usually I would agree with the comment #183 (comment)

But other modules are doing the same: class parameter to set the ensure or enable state.

@ttousai can you please rebase your branch?

[h-haaks]

I tend to agree with @TheMeier on this one.
We usually have params to manage the service or not, and if we do manage it we have params to ensure stopped/running and enabled/disabled ( at boot )

If there is another tool involved managing the service state that tool should manage the enabled/disabled state as well.

[tuxmea]

There are reasons why puppet should not start the service. e.g. nfs ist started by pacemaker/corosync.
From my point of view the request to have a parameter makes sense.
Maybe the description was a little bit misleading.

[h-haaks]

To me the example you mention is exactly the kind of edge case where I would set manage_server_service to false and manage the service in a profile class.

[saz]

For e.g. pacemaker setups, everything should be managed by Puppet, except the state of the service, as this should be handled by pacemaker.

There's already a parameter available server_service_ensure.
Shouldn't it be enough to allow undef to be set here?