Comments interspersed... Greg.
On Tue, 2012-09-25 at 03:59, Dan Creswell wrote: > On 25 September 2012 08:46, Simon IJskes - QCG <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 25-09-12 09:15, Dan Creswell wrote: > > > > If we really see value in the above, can we consider providing something > >> else that works for an ops team too? (Cos none I've ever come across would > >> touch the above with a barge-pole). Or can we at least make it clear what > >> mechanisms should be in place for "best practice" (jeez, I hate that > >> term). > >> Sure. No reason you can't also have an external configuration, and make it so the external config overrides the annotation-based config. That's exactly the way it is in EE5/EE6. The practise there seems to be that coders put a "baseline" config into the annotations, and ops team overrides them in the config file if appropriate. There also seems to be a lot of cases in the EE5/EE6 world that I talk to where there isn't the coders are the ops team, or where ops treats the app as a black box, so annotations are mostly it. At the same time, many places seem to have an ops team that is competent and involved. So the mechanism needs to handle both cases. > > > > Glad you introduced ops teams. Would a middle ground be possible? Two > > options: A annotation refering to a part in a deployment configuration > > file, or using the annotations as defaults, and provide ops team with a > > overriding option? > > > > > I was edging towards the latter whilst scribbling the above... > > > > Gr. Simon > > > >
