openstack team mailing list archive

[Mark McLoughlin <markmc@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Joe,

On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 17:42 -0700, Joseph Heck wrote:
> I personally don't have a huge preference one way or the other. I've
> used a global object for configuration in applications, and find it
> immensely convenient, and the methods that Mark (and others) have put
> into the openstack/common/cfg seem pretty amenable to adding on
> options as needed - top of code or within modules as relevant.
> 
> If keystone wants to use it as a global, that doesn't necessarily mean
> that Glance, Nova, Swift, etc. has to. Is it far to extend the usage
> patterns so that we can clear state, etc. for working with it as a
> global object?

I think the use (or not) of a global config object is something that
makes sense for us to agree on across projects because which way you go
totally affects the usage patterns. Where we can, we should avoid folks
having to arbitrarily re-adjust for stuff like this as they move between
projects.

Also, it makes it easier to share code between projects if we use the
same patterns.

> Most importantly to me, there are two rather nasty outstanding bugs
> blocking RC1 in Keystone that are pending the outcome of this
> conversation:
>  * https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/942793
>  * https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/949373

It looks like my patches fixes those but, of course, they're probably
fixable with some much smaller fixes too.

> with a set of changes from Mark all pending and ready to roll:
> https://review.openstack.org/#change,4547 (and several dependent on
> that one)

I've re-based and re-pushed the patch series.

Cheers,
Mark.