Open Stack

On 2015-01-28 6:30 PM, Tom Fifield wrote:
> On 29/01/15 07:28, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> On 01/27/2015 11:00 PM, Tom Fifield wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Based on Gustavo's excellent work below, talking with many ops, and
>>> after a brief chats with Jeremey and a few other TC folks, here's what
>>> I'd propose as an end goal:
>>>
>>> * A git repository that has raw, sample configs in it for each project
>>> that will be automagically updated
>>>
>>> * Raw configs distributed in the tar files we make as part of the release
>>>
>>> Does that seem acceptable for us all?
>>
>> It is not. Since it has been already discuss, but we're still not having
>> any counter point of argumentation, I shall repeat myself, until sanity
>> gets restored.
>>
>> You are still *not* addressing the main issue: the .sample config files
>> *must* match your environment and the version of the different libs on
>> which a given service is going to run. Therefore, any attempt to go back
>> to the previous situation (where we have already pre-built config files)
>> can be considered a grave regression.
>
> Actually, many folks I spoke to didn't really care about this.
>
>

I'm very well aware that configs "exported" by 3rd party libraries might 
not reflect exactly what I have in my own environment. This is a 
downside many operators are willing to accept to get back a simple 
sample config file.

Many operators (myself included, of course) used to rely on the sample 
config file found in the repository of the project and it did a *great* 
job. Now it's gone and all proposed/alternative solutions just doesn't 
cut it for us *operators*, not packagers, developers, etc.

I proposed this exact same solution back when Cinder proposed removing 
its own sample config file [1], I was just too busy/lazy to follow up 
with my own idea. Now someone is doing it for real, I'm happy.

[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/96581/

-- 
Mathieu