# Abridged summary of ansible-project@googlegroups.com - 18 updates in 8 topics **URL:** \ **Category:** Ansible Project\ **Tags:** ansible-project, aws\ **Created:** [September 9, 2015, 6:50pm UTC](https://forum.ansible.com/t/abridged-summary-of-ansible-project-googlegroups-com-18-updates-in-8-topics/19216 "2015-09-09T18:50:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Kesten\_Broughton2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecc23a/32.png) [@Kesten\_Broughton2](https://forum.ansible.com/u/Kesten_Broughton2)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2015, 6:50pm UTC](https://forum.ansible.com/t/abridged-summary-of-ansible-project-googlegroups-com-18-updates-in-8-topics/19216/1 "2015-09-09T18:50:32Z")
I separate my creation and provisioning into aws.yml and site.yml. Often we start with a few servers and then increase the size later. I'd like to use aws exact\_count in the aws.yml but I do not want to allow destructive behavior. It would be nice if we could pass allow\_destroy to ec2\_module so that exact\_count would have "at least" semantics. It can be pretty dangerous if you forget to limit the playbook correctly and accidentally delete a bunch of servers because your scope was too large. I think non-destructive behaviour as a default would have avoided this situation as well. [https://github.com/ansible/ansible/issues/9431](https://github.com/ansible/ansible/issues/9431) Would a pr for this be considered? Kesten Broughton 512 701 4209