Why are we monkey patching TaskExecutor instead of providing a proper VarsModule?

[lpirl]

Is there anything (apart from checking become) why monkey patching TaskExecutor is a superior solution to just writing a VarsModule?

IMHO the present approach torpedoes the idea of "vars plugins" (and the Law of Demeter).

In order to gain readability and comprehensibility (which is surely is subjective) for investigating #4, a refactored version of your wonderful plugin resulted. In this refactored version, you can find an example implementation as a "vars plugin".

The refactored version also contains the changes I pull-requested (plus: it moves all functions out the scope of the module, fixes to be more compliant with PEP 8, etc.).

[Nekmo]

Thanks for your work @lpirl, I am going to test your solution using your var_module. I don't remember the reason to use monkey patching but if possible using a vars_module is always preferable. Thanks!

I also apologize for the delay in answering.

[lpirl]

I also apologize for the delay in answering.

Take your time – we're all doing this voluntarily. :)