Hi,
Currently we duplicate configurations for servicecomb prefix to cse prefix, and
in code we can read configurations by cse prefix. That is:
1. Config file using servicecomb.x.y, can read in code with
getProperty("servicecomb.x.y") and getProperty("cse.x.y")
2. Config file using cse.x.y, can read in code with getProperty("cse.x.y")
If we use cse prefix in code, this is the most portable way to read both
cse.x.y and servicecomb.x.y configurations.
However, this will leading us to write code always using cse, this is not our
intention. We are asking users/developers to using servicecomb gradually.
I suggest we use servicecomb prefix when adding new configuration items. But
there maybe some axtra work users need to do. For example,
One user's project using cse prefix:
cse:
function:
a: false
b: false
And when we add a new configuration item: servicecomb.funciton.c, users must
change the configuration file to one of the following:
servicecomb:
function:
a: false
b: false
c: false
or
cse:
function:
a: false
b: false
servicecomb:
function:
c: false
I think we need to encourage users using servicecomb when upgrading, and
developers to use servicecomb prefix when adding new configuration items.
Any idea?
