incubator-bloodhound-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Olemis Lang <ole...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [BEP-0003] Request for comments : DB configuration vs ConfigParser
Date Mon, 07 Jan 2013 08:20:15 GMT
On 1/6/13, Olemis Lang <olemis@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/6/13, Gary Martin <gary.martin@wandisco.com> wrote:
>> On 04/01/13 23:11, Olemis Lang wrote:
>>> While working on #115 I've tried to keep new config objects interface
>>> identical to Trac's . Nonetheless the later have two levels of caching
>>> :
>>>
>>>    1. `_cache` instance method
>>>    2. Mapping object(s) used under the hood by ConfigParser instance
>>>       used to load INI file (e.g. trac.ini)
>>>
[...]
>>>
>>> The circumstances for multi-product configuration are a bit different
>>> considering the fact that settings will be stored in the DB .
>>>
[...]
>>> ... so I'd like to know beforehand if anybody has anything to say
>>> about that subject . Comments ? Objections ?
>>>
>>
>> I am interested in the scope of configuration that we are aiming to
>> achieve here. Are we only going to be considering a limited set of
>> options so that per-product settings cannot cause conflicts or are we
>> likely to go much further than this?
>>
>
> The initial solution I'm writing considers product-specific
> configuration inherits global configuration , working just like
> current [inherit] section.

JFTR , I'm developing this in branch t115_product_env [1]_ (hg patch
queue) . At the moment test run reports 3 errors , 3 failures so I'm
estimating tomorrow this will be ready , unless I entangle with some
bizarre issue (... like #337 ;)

.. [1] branch t115_product_env @ bloodhound-mq repository
        (https://bitbucket.org/olemis/bloodhound-mq/src/t115_product_env)

-- 
Regards,

Olemis.

Blog ES: http://simelo-es.blogspot.com/
Blog EN: http://simelo-en.blogspot.com/

Featured article:

Mime
View raw message