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
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to