Encourage users to classify using `simp::classes` rather than `classes`

This log records a significant past decision that hasn't been widely circulated.

Status
DECIDED
Impact

LOW

Driver
ApproverTrevor Vaughan
ContributorsTrevor Vaughan Chris Tessmer Liz Nemsick
Informed
Due date
Outcome

We should encourage users to add their own classifications using the simp::classes parameter instead of the (now-legacy) classes lookup key.

Background





Relevant data

Options considered


Option 1:
DescriptionWe should encourage users to add their own classifications using the simp::classes parameter instead of the (now-legacy) classes lookup key.
Pros and cons

(plus) The simp::classes parameter is already provided by the simp profile to support scenarios' internal classifications.

(plus) Reusing simp::classes for user classifications makes them subject to the same flow control (e.g., knockout prefixes) as the SIMP's internal classifications.

(plus) This avoids needing a lot of extra documentation to enable agentless deployments to either reuse the site.pp classification strategy, or maintain separate (and recurring) classification guidance for site.pp+classes and simp::classes

(question) Combining users' and the simp's internal classification data streams joins two separate concerns (impact: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ )

Estimated cost
LOW

Action items

  •  

Outcome

We should encourage users to add their own classifications using the simp::classes parameter instead of the (now-legacy) classes lookup key.