I use Salt environments to provide each of my team mates the ability to develop
and test their Salt changes. And I've found that when we run this formula from
our environments against our salt-master, comments in some files change. For us
this represents an unwanted and unplanned change. I understand the intention -
to identify how or why the file changed, but I firmly believe that we should
be able to run highstsate with test=True and only see intended changes. Here's
an example:

            ID: salt-cloud-providers
      Function: file.recurse
          Name: /etc/salt/cloud.providers.d
        Result: None
       Comment: #### /etc/salt/cloud.providers.d/saltify.conf ####
                The file /etc/salt/cloud.providers.d/saltify.conf is set to be changed
       Started: 20:01:28.586441
      Duration: 75.185 ms
       Changes:
                ----------
                /etc/salt/cloud.providers.d/saltify.conf:
                    ----------
                    diff:
                        ---
                        +++
                        @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
                        -# This file is managed by Salt via salt://salt/files/cloud.providers.d/saltify.conf?saltenv=myenv
                        +# This file is managed by Salt via salt://salt/files/cloud.providers.d/saltify.conf?saltenv=dev

                         saltify:
                           provider: saltify

As discussed in PR#305, these are defaults that even if they are
configurable as probably not suited to a majority of users and causes
delete/add output on highstate of user of the formula choses to use
the same file name.

Needed because salt-cloud will attempt to load them even if they are
filled with invalid default values, creating error spam.

This commit also provides a more concrete example of a 'host' to
be saltified.  Users can do

    salt-cloud -p make_salty someinstance

or

    salt-cloud -m /etc/salt/cloud.maps.d/foo.conf

Either which way the online docs should really be updated with more
concrete examples.