On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 09:29 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: > On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 1:58 AM, Mark McLoughlin <mar...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Hey > > > > On Tue, 2014-06-17 at 17:43 +0200, Julien Danjou wrote: > >> On Tue, Jun 17 2014, Arnaud Legendre wrote: > >> > @Julien: I would be interested to understand the value that you see of > >> > having only one config file? At this point, I don't see why managing one > >> > file is more complicated than managing several files especially when they > >> > are organized by categories. Also, scrolling through the registry > >> > settings > >> > every time I want to modify an api setting seem to add some overhead. > >> > >> Because there's no way to automatically generate several configuration > >> files with each its own set of options using oslo.config. > > > > I think that's a failing of oslo.config, though. Glance's layout of > > config files is useful and intuitive. > > The config generator lets you specify the modules, libraries, and > files to be used to generate a config file. It even has a way to > specify which files to ignore. So I think we have everything we need > in the config generator, but we need to run it more than once, with > different inputs, to generate multiple files.
Yep, except the magic way we troll through the code, loading modules, introspecting what config options were registered, etc. will likely make this a frustrating experience to get right. I took a little time to hack up a much more simple and explicit approach to config file generation and posted a draft here: https://review.openstack.org/100946 The docstring at the top of the file explains the approach: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/100946/1/oslo/config/generator.py Thanks, Mark. _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStackfirstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev