On 06/11/2014 08:12 PM, Mathieu Gagné wrote: > On 2014-06-11, 7:52 PM, Sean Dague wrote: >> >> Honestly, I really like >> >> [nova] >> >> better than >> >> [clients_nova] >> >> And as we're going to have to live with this for a while, I'd rather use >> the more clear version of this in keystone instead of the Heat stanzas. >> > > What about [novaclient] or [nova_client] ? > > I'm concerned about the [nova] section being (one day) overloaded with > options unrelated to the actual nova client configuration. Although my > concern could be wrong.
I feel like you need to put your opperator hat on when it comes to conf
files. Nova is the compute service. Talking to nova is doing nova
things. Nova_client has no real meaning, and it actually gets kind of
confusing what's a client in an openstack cloud.
Because neutron is a nova client, nova is a neutron / glance client /
cinder client, glance is a swift client.
So that subtlety makes sense to people that spend time reading code. But
from an Ops perspective, seems to just add a layer of confusion.
The config file should be a view that makes sense from configuring a
system by someone that's not reading the code. Not just a reflection of
the code structure dejour that parses it.
Which is why I think [nova] makes sense.
-Sean
--
Sean Dague
http://dague.net
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
