<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">I tend to disagree with the whole idea. Not sure 100% though yet. Could you please explain the point of scattering configuration all over the code? In my opinion, we’re mixing different application concerns. With the current approach I always know where to look at in order to find all my configuration option definitions (types, descriptions etc.) but with this refactoring it seems to be a tricky task.<div><br></div><div>Thoughts? What benefits of doing that?<br><div><br><div>
<div>Renat Akhmerov</div><div>@ Mirantis Inc.</div><div><br></div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
</div>
<br><div><div>On 16 May 2014, at 21:32, Dmitri Zimine <<a href="mailto:dz@stackstorm.com">dz@stackstorm.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;"><div><div>+1 for breaking down the configuration by modules. </div><div><br></div><div>Not sure about names for configuration group. Do you mean just using the same group name? or more? </div><div><br></div><div>IMO groups are project specific; it doesn’t always make sense to use the same group name in the context of different projects. Our requirement is 1) auto-generate mistral.conf.example from the config.py and 2) sections make sense in the product context.</div><div><br></div><div>For example: how do we deal with rpc_backend and transport_url for oslo messaging? Should we do something like CONF.import(_transport_opts, “oslo.messaging.transport”, “transport”)? And use it by passing the group, not entire contfig, like:</div><div><br></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>transport = messaging.get_transport(cfg.messaging.CONF)</div><div>instead of</div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>transport = messaging.get_transport(cfg.CONF)</div><div><br></div><div>DZ> </div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>On May 16, 2014, at 12:46 PM, W Chan <<a href="mailto:m4d.coder@gmail.com">m4d.coder@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr">Regarding config opts for keystone, the keystoneclient middleware already registers the opts at <a href="https://github.com/openstack/python-keystoneclient/blob/master/keystoneclient/middleware/auth_token.py#L325">https://github.com/openstack/python-keystoneclient/blob/master/keystoneclient/middleware/auth_token.py#L325</a> under a keystone_authtoken group in the config file. Currently, Mistral registers the opts again at <a href="https://github.com/stackforge/mistral/blob/master/mistral/config.py#L108">https://github.com/stackforge/mistral/blob/master/mistral/config.py#L108</a> under a different configuration group. Should we remove the duplicate from Mistral and refactor the reference to keystone configurations to the keystone_authtoken group? This seems more consistent.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 1:13 PM, W Chan <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:m4d.coder@gmail.com" target="_blank">m4d.coder@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">Currently, the various configurations are registered in ./mistral/config.py. The configurations are registered when mistral.config is referenced. Given the way the code is written, PEP8 throws referenced but not used error if mistral.config is referenced but not called in the module. In various use cases, this is avoided by using importutils to import mistral.config (i.e. <a href="https://github.com/stackforge/mistral/blob/master/mistral/tests/unit/engine/test_transport.py#L34" target="_blank">https://github.com/stackforge/mistral/blob/master/mistral/tests/unit/engine/test_transport.py#L34</a>). I want to break down registration code in ./mistral/config.py into separate functions for api, engine, db, etc and move the registration closer to the module where the configuration is needed. Any objections?</div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
_______________________________________________<br>OpenStack-dev mailing list<br><a href="mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org">OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev</a><br></blockquote></div><br></div>_______________________________________________<br>OpenStack-dev mailing list<br><a href="mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org">OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org</a><br>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div></body></html>