Open Stack

On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 10:31 PM Sean McGinnis <sean.mcginnis at gmx.com> wrote:
>
> On 7/1/20 2:24 PM, Hongbin Lu wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > A short question. I saw a few projects are using the name 'ca_file'
> > [1] as config option, while others are using 'cafile' [2]. I wonder
> > what is the flavorite name convention?
> >
> > I asked this question because Kolla developer suggested Zun to rename
> > from 'ca_file' to 'cafile' to avoid the confusion [3]. I want to
> > confirm if this is a good idea from Keystone's perspective. Thanks.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Hongbin
> >
> > [1]
> > http://codesearch.openstack.org/?q=cfg.StrOpt%5C(%27ca_file%27&i=nope&files=&repos=
> > [2]
> > http://codesearch.openstack.org/?q=cfg.StrOpt%5C(%27cafile%27&i=nope&files=&repos=
> > [3] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/738329/
>
> Cinder and Glance both use ca_file (and ssl_ca_file and vmware_ca_file,
> and registry_client_ca_file).
>  From keystone_auth, we do also have cafile.
>
> Personally, I find the separation of ca_file to be much easier to read.
>
> Sean
>
>

Yeah, it was me to suggest the aliasing. We found that the 'cafile'
seems more prevalent. We missed that underscore for Zun and scratched
our heads "what are we doing wrong there?".

Nova has its most interesting because it uses cafile for clients but
ca_file for hypervisors 🤷

-yoctozepto