[Web-SIG] more comments on Paste Deploy

[Joseph Tate]

On Saturday 03 March 2007 15:54:41 Ian Bicking wrote:
> Chad Whitacre wrote:
> > I suggest that a system with multiple simple config files is much
> > more scalable than a single complex config file syntax. Imagine
> > if all of Unix were configured using a single syntax!
>
> There's other cases where having both options is nice.  Because Paste
> Deploy doesn't fold config files together, you can also reuse them from
> different contexts.  (A more common way to use multiple config files --
> what ConfigParser.load supports -- is to just overlap all the sections,
> usually totally clobbering each other.  I like this more explicit way of
> bringing in configuration, which treats configuration like a composable
> set of configurations instead of a system where all the configuration
> files are pretty tightly bound to each other.)

I find that multiple files gives you a nice way to override defaults.  As long 
as the files are read in a way that's predictable and documentable, and 
ultimately appear as if read from a single file (and possible displayable via 
some diagnostics link in an application).

-- 
Joseph Tate
Software Engineer
rPath Inc.
http://www.rpath.com/rbuilder/
(919) 851-3984 x2106