[Grok-dev] buildout-generated config files in grokproject

Uli Fouquet uli at gnufix.de
Thu Feb 5 18:05:24 EST 2009

Hi Brandon,

Brandon Craig Rhodes wrote:
> Uli Fouquet <uli at gnufix.de> writes:
> >   SampleProject/
> >      + etc/  (now empty before running buildout)
> >      + cfg_templates/
> >           + README.txt (tells what purpose files in this dir have)
> >           + deploy.ini.in
> > ...
> >
> > Before finishing this task, I would like to know, what you think about 
> >
> > * the template directory being placed in the project root (could there 
> >   be a better place?),
> > * the name of the directory (could there be a shorter name?)
> I myself would be tempted to place the templates under "./etc/" and then
> the filled-in templates under "./parts/etc/", because otherwise you're
> violating the practice that everything generated belongs under "parts".
> I think that hiding the directory of generated conf files under "parts"
> will make it much easier for newcomers to guess which file they're
> supposed to edit when, say, their "debug.ini" needs to change.

Good point. On the other hand we currently tell newcomers to do::

  $ bin/paster serve etc/deploy.ini

which then would become::

  $ bin/paster serve parts/cfg/deploy.ini

or similar. The first is the path also repoze uses, as Michael told me
and I personally like the clean, short path. 

The path to the generated file is also certainly used more often on
commandlines than the path to the template, right? When hiding it away,
we also hide the way to start the whole thing ;-)

I am undecided, slightly tending to support Brandons suggestion. Are
there more arguments?

Best regards,


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Url : http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/grok-dev/attachments/20090206/f565dc03/attachment.bin 

More information about the Grok-dev mailing list