Hi,
The default neutron configuration files aren't useable by default. So,
I'm heavily patching them in my Debian package. This isn't an idea
situation already, especially that I have to rebase my patch on each
(pre-)release. Though here, if I'm not mistaking, we're having a
completely *wrong*
Hi Thomas,
it probably won't be a bad idea if you can share the patches you're
applying to the default configuration files.
I think all distros are patching them anyway, so this might allow us to
provide mostly ready to use config files.
Is there a chance you can push something to gerrit?
@lists.openstack.org
Sent: Wednesday, April 2, 2014 9:45:05 AM
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Missleading and hardly parseable default neutron
config files
On 04/02/2014 06:38 AM, Salvatore Orlando wrote:
Hi Thomas,
it probably won't be a bad idea if you can share the patches you're
applying to the default
On 04/02/2014 10:10 AM, Russell Bryant wrote:
On 04/02/2014 11:01 AM, Solly Ross wrote:
IMHO, having Example: on a separate line from the actual option is a lot
easier for humans:
you just delete a single character or use your editor-of-choice's uncomment
macro to activate
a line.
Sure,
On 04/02/2014 11:01 AM, Solly Ross wrote:
IMHO, having Example: on a separate line from the actual option is a lot
easier for humans:
you just delete a single character or use your editor-of-choice's uncomment
macro to activate
a line.
Sure, agreed. But in any case, it seems to make sense
On 04/02/2014 11:01 PM, Solly Ross wrote:
IMHO, having Example: on a separate line from the actual option is a lot
easier for humans:
you just delete a single character or use your editor-of-choice's uncomment
macro to activate
a line.
Please re-read what I wrote. There's things like:
#
On 04/02/2014 06:38 PM, Salvatore Orlando wrote:
Hi Thomas,
it probably won't be a bad idea if you can share the patches you're
applying to the default configuration files.
I think all distros are patching them anyway, so this might allow us to
provide mostly ready to use config files.
