On 11/17/2014 06:57 PM, Vishvananda Ishaya wrote: > > On Nov 6, 2014, at 7:56 PM, Ian Wienand <iwien...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> On 10/29/2014 12:42 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: >>> Another way to do this, which has been used in some other projects, >>> is to define one option for a list of “names” of things, and use >>> those names to make groups with each field >> >> I've proposed that in . I look forward to some -1's :) >> >>> OTOH, oslo.config is not the only way we have to support >>> configuration. This looks like a good example of settings that are >>> more complex than what oslo.config is meant to handle, and that >>> might be better served in a separate file with the location of that >>> file specified in an oslo.config option. >> >> My personal opinion is that yet-another-config-file in possibly >> yet-another-format is just a few lines of code, but has a pretty high >> cost for packagers, testers, admins, etc. So I feel like that's >> probably a last-resort. > > In most discussions I’ve had with deployers, the prefer multiple files, as it > is easier to create a new file via puppet or chef when a feature is turned > on than to add a bunch of new sections in the middle of an existing file.
+1 -Sean -- Sean Dague http://dague.net
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStackemail@example.com http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev