incubator-zeta-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Pic <james...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [zeta-dev] Configuration component override mechanism : requirement doc
Date Fri, 13 Aug 2010 11:31:52 GMT
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 8:51 PM, Jerome Renard <jerome.renard@gmail.com> wrote:
> James,
>
> On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 3:15 PM, James Pic <jamespic@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 2:19 PM, Jerome Renard <jerome.renard@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Context aware configuration files
>>> ---------------------------------
>>>
>>> Creating a website requires to go through 3 different execution contexts:
>>>
>>> 1. dev
>>> 2. staging
>>> 3. production
>>>
>>> Each context has its own specificities. For example the database used for each
>>> of these 3 contexts is different. So this must be defined for each context and
>>> used according to the one the web application is actually running in.
>>>
>>> Those 3 contexts should be handled by the Configuration component, during the
>>> configuration directive merge process.
>>>
>>> Directory structure
>>> -------------------
>>>
>>> In order to provide a clean directory structure the Configuration component
>>> should be able to read and understand a directory structure compared to this
>>> one: ::
>>>
>>>     /[..]/conf/
>>>             |-- common
>>>             |   |-- dev
>>>             |   |-- prod
>>>             |   `-- staging
>>>             `-- apps
>>>                 |-- app1
>>>                 |   |-- dev
>>>                 |   |-- prod
>>>                 |   `-- staging
>>>                 `-- app2
>>>                     |-- dev
>>>                     |-- prod
>>>                     `-- staging
>>>
>>
>> What if that's *not* what the user wants? Will he still be able to use
>> the merger with simple ezcConfiguration objects? In that case i see no
>> objections ;)
>
> Hmm I did not thought about that problematic, but I think that if we do our job
> correctly we should be able to use the merge mechanism on two files. What do
> you think ?
>

I though maybe we could just allow the user to merge configuration
objects into another configuration object, which can then be used by
your special manager, or normal managers, or normal writers and/or
readers.

Would that be simple and efficient enought?


-- 
http://jamespic.com/contact
Customer is king - Le client est roi - El cliente es rey.

Mime
View raw message