Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

config: consider sourcing options from files #252

Closed
lucab opened this issue Jul 19, 2019 · 2 comments
Closed

config: consider sourcing options from files #252

lucab opened this issue Jul 19, 2019 · 2 comments

Comments

@lucab
Copy link
Contributor

lucab commented Jul 19, 2019

Afterburn is currently a one-short binary, entirely configured via command-line flags. This is on purpose to keep the complexity (both internally and externally) low.

Our service units are generally written to be easy to override via drop-ins, such as:

[Service]
Environment=AFTERBURN_OPT_PROVIDER="--provider foo"

However, if we start increasing the design complexity (e.g. with a daemon mode, #228), we should consider sourcing file-based configurations.

This would be ideally done via overlayed directories with dropins, plus a simple and standard format (e.g. TOML).

@lucab
Copy link
Contributor Author

lucab commented Jul 19, 2019

This follows up to @cgwalters's suggestion from openshift/machine-config-operator#964 (comment).

I'm not keen to go down this route right now, but this is pretty much a pre-requisite if we are doing big architectural changes like #228.

@prestist
Copy link
Contributor

Currently we do not have a need for a config file for afterburn. We can revisit this if needed.

@prestist prestist closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Jan 12, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants