On 27/03/14 18:10 +1300, Robert Collins wrote:
On 27 March 2014 17:30, Tom Fifield <t...@openstack.org> wrote:Does anyone disagree?/me raises hand When I was an operator, I regularly referred to the sample config files in the git repository. If there weren't generated versions of the sample config in the repo, I would probably grep the code (not an ideal user experience!). Running some random script that I don't know about the existence and might depend on having something else installed of is probably not something that would happen.So, I think its important you have sample configs to refer to. Do they need to be in the git repo? Note that because libraries now export config options (which is the root of this problem!) you cannot ever know from the source all the options for a service - you *must* know the library versions you are running, to interrogate them for their options. We can - and should - have a discussion about the appropriateness of the layering leak we have today, but in the meantime this is breaking multiple projects every time any shared library that uses oslo.config changes any config option... so we need to solve the workflow aspect. How about we make a copy of the latest config for each project for each series - e.g. trunk of everything, Icehouse of servers with trunk of everything else, etc and make that easily acccessible?
I'd agree with the original proposal if - and only if - something like what Robert proposed here is done. I'd say the config file could be generated for each milestone cut and live in the milestone branch. As Tom pointed out, referring to the sample configs is very useful from many points of view (operations, support, development etc). Cheers, Flavio -- @flaper87 Flavio Percoco
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStackfirstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev