Open Stack

On 07/20/2015 10:07 AM, Martin Mágr wrote:
> Hey Yanis
>
> On 07/17/2015 10:56 AM, Yanis Guenane wrote:
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>>
>> if set the value would have been set else it would default to upstream
>> default.
>>
>> But Mathieu raised a fair point here[2] is that an empty string for some
>> settings is a valid value, and hence we can't rely on
>> it.
>>  
>> Since the beginning we are trying to avoid the use of a magic string,
>> but
>> I am starting to run out of idea here.
>>
>> Does someone has an idea on which sane value the default could be ?
>
> How about  '*config_default*'? Or whatever similar which says you want
> the default value, but will potentially never be value of any parameter.
>
> Regards,
> Martin
>
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>>
>> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/202488
>> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/202574
>> -- 
>> Yanis Guenane
>>
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe:
>> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
>
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe:
> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Following on the thread, and following the discussion that took place
during last week meeting[1],

The patchset[2] and the example[3] have been updated not to ensure
absent for a nil string due to its valid usage in some cases,
but to ensure absent when '<SERVICE DEFAULT>' is specified. Based on the
community feedback this string
isn't used across any component.

During the meeting xarses had an alternative idea, if once mocked up you
could send a follow-up mail in this
thread so we can grasp the idea.

@Mathieu: if the new approach is ok with you, could you please review
your -2 on that patchset

Thanks in advance for your feedbacks,

[1]
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/puppet/2015/puppet.2015-07-21-14.59.log.html
[2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/202574/
[3] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/202513/

--
Yanis Guenane