aurora-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joshua Cohen <jco...@twopensource.com>
Subject Re: Using a config file to support custom executors: potential paradigm shift
Date Thu, 02 Jul 2015 20:00:28 GMT
+1 to #1 for the short term, but I'd like us to assess #3 in the long term.

On Thursday, July 2, 2015, Zameer Manji <zmanji@apache.org> wrote:

> I am in favor of #1 to prevent yak shaving.
>
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Bill Farner <wfarner@apache.org
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for starting this discussion, Renan!
> >
> > I think it's clear that the feature you're adding calls for a
> configuration
> > file.  I'm realizing now that we do have some precedent for configuration
> > files with the recently-introduced security controls [1].  In that case
> the
> > sane path was obvious since we pass the configuration file in an
> > established format to third-party code (Apache Shiro).
> >
> > I see several paths ahead:
> >
> > 1.) start with individual feature-oriented configuration files and
> > re-assess down the road
> >
> > 2.) establish a convention for a single global configuration file
> >
> > 3.) (2) and migrate command line arguments to a configuration file
> >
> > My personal preference is (1), so as to not force Renan to start a yak
> > shave, and because i think willingness to change things down the road is
> > important.
> >
> > I include (3) because people have inquired about that in the past.
> >
> > Does anyone have a preference which path we take?  Are there other
> options
> > i'm not thinking about?
> >
> >
> > [1]
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/aurora/blob/master/docs/security.md#http-spnego-authentication-kerberos
> >
> > -=Bill
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 3:34 PM, Renan DelValle <rdelval1@binghamton.edu
> <javascript:;>>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I'm currently working on bringing custom executor support to Aurora
> > > (AURORA-1288). As development and discussions about the most adequate
> > > solution to this problem have moved along, I've reached a crossroad
> > > where I need the community's input on the implementation path this
> > > feature will take.
> > >
> > > Right now, after evaluating other options,  it seems that the safest
> > > and most flexible way to providing users the ability to configure
> > > their own custom executor may be to use a configuration file.
> > >
> > > However, as there is no previous use of a config file (everything has
> > > been done through command line up until now), a discussion is
> > > necessary about this possible shift in paradigm due to the fact that,
> > > if this route is taken, it will set a precedent for Aurora.
> > >
> > > As Bill Farner said in his comment on Jira, all in all, this is
> > > discussion should be about how should approach this potential paradigm
> > > shift.
> > >
> > > -Renan
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Zameer Manji
> >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message