Open Stack

On 17/06/14 23:30, Arnaud Legendre wrote:
> @ZhiYan: I don't like the idea of removing the sample configuration file(s) from the git repository. Many people do not want to have to checkout the entire codebase and tox every time they have to verify a variable name in a configuration file. I know many people who were really frustrated where they realized that the sample config file was gone from the Nova repo.

For reference, see also the recent discussion around cinder.conf.sample: 
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/96581/ to learn more about ops wishes 
regarding sample configuration files.

> However, I agree with the fact that it would be better if the sample was 100% accurate: so the way I would love to see this working is to generate the sample file every time there is a config change (this being totally automated (maybe at the gate level...)).
>
> @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.
>
> Thanks,
> Arnaud
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Zhi Yan Liu" <lzy.dev at gmail.com>
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 7:47:53 AM
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [glance] Unifying configuration file
>
> Frankly I don't like the idea of using single configuration for all
> service too, I think it will be cool if we can generate separated
> configuration template files automatically for each Glance service. So
> besides https://review.openstack.org/#/c/83327/ , actually I'm working
> on that idea as well, to allow deployer generates separated
> configuration files on demand, and then probably we could move those
> templates away from code repo.
>
> But I like your idea for paste.ini template part.
>
> zhiyan
>
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:29 PM, Kuvaja, Erno <kuvaja at hp.com> wrote:
>> I do not like this idea. As now we are on 5 different config files (+ policy and schema). One for each (API and Registry) would still be ok, but putting all together would just become messy.
>>
>> If the *-paste.ini will be migrated to .conf files that would bring it down, but please do not try to mix reg and API configs together.
>>
>> - Erno (jokke) Kuvaja
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Flavio Percoco [mailto:flavio at redhat.com]
>>> Sent: 17 June 2014 15:19
>>> To: openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [glance] Unifying configuration file
>>>
>>> On 17/06/14 15:59 +0200, Julien Danjou wrote:
>>>> Hi guys,
>>>>
>>>> So I've started to look at the configuration file used by Glance and I
>>>> want to switch to one configuration file only.
>>>> I stumbled upon this blueprint:
>>>>
>>>>   https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=https://blueprints.launchpad.net/glance/%2Bspec/use-oslo-config&k=oIvRg1%2BdGAgOoM1BIlLLqw%3D%3D%0A&r=5wWaXo2oVaivfKLCMyU6Z9UTO8HOfeGCzbGHAT4gZpo%3D%0A&m=QTguordmDDZNC%2FRUVedjVKf5cPErz5dhlJAZA56YqWU%3D%0A&s=ce068ea89b0fbf4260f6f8f18758f99b407536ec391c7c7392a079fc550ba468
>>>>
>>>
>>> w.r.t using config.generator https://review.openstack.org/#/c/83327/
>>>
>>>> which fits.
>>>>
>>>> Does not look like I can assign myself to it, but if someone can do so,
>>>> go ahead.
>>>>
>>>> So I've started to work on that, and I got it working. My only problem
>>>> right now, concerned the [paste_deploy] options that is provided by
>>>> Glance. I'd like to remove this section altogether, as it's not
>>>> possible to have it and have the same configuration file read by both
>>>> glance-api and glance-registry.
>>>> My idea is also to unify glance-api-paste.ini and
>>>> glance-registry-paste.ini into glance-paste.ini and then have each
>>>> server reads their default pipeline (pipeline:glance-api).
>>>>
>>>> Does that sounds reasonable to everyone?
>>>
>>> +1, it sounds like a good idea. I don't think we need to maintain 2
>>> separate config files, especially now that the registry service is optional.
>>>
>>> Thanks for working on this.
>>> Flavio
>>>
>>> --
>>> @flaper87
>>> Flavio Percoco
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>