explain some rationales about the config format
This commit is contained in:
parent
5fd5b91b92
commit
08dffac7b4
1 changed files with 106 additions and 0 deletions
106
doc/CONFIGURING.org
Normal file
106
doc/CONFIGURING.org
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,106 @@
|
|||
I feel like it's good to keep the rationales in the documentation,
|
||||
but happy to [[https://github.com/karlicoss/HPI/issues/46][discuss]] it here.
|
||||
|
||||
Before discussing the abstract matters, let's consider a specific situation.
|
||||
Say, we want to let the user configure [[https://github.com/karlicoss/HPI/blob/master/my/bluemaestro/__init__.py][bluemaestro]] module.
|
||||
At the moment, it uses the following config attributes:
|
||||
|
||||
- ~export_path~
|
||||
|
||||
Path to the data, this is obviously a *required* attribute
|
||||
|
||||
- ~cache_path~
|
||||
|
||||
Cache is extremely useful to speed up some queries. But it's *optional*, everything should work without it.
|
||||
|
||||
I'll refer to this config as *specific* further in the doc.
|
||||
|
||||
Now, the requirements I see, approximately in the order of decreasing importance (at least as I see it):
|
||||
|
||||
1. configuration should be *extremely* flexible
|
||||
|
||||
We need to make sure it's very easy to combine/filter/extend data without having to modify and rewrite the module code.
|
||||
This means using a powerful language for config, and realistically, a Turing complete.
|
||||
|
||||
General: that means that you should be able to use powerful, potentially running arbitrary code if
|
||||
this is something
|
||||
|
||||
Specific: we've got Python already, so it makes a lot of sense to use it!
|
||||
|
||||
#+begin_src python
|
||||
class bluemaestro:
|
||||
export_path = '/path/to/bluemaestro'
|
||||
cache_path = '/tmp/bluemaestro.cache'
|
||||
#+end_src
|
||||
|
||||
Downsides:
|
||||
|
||||
- keeping it Turing complete means it's potentially less accessible to people less familiar with programming
|
||||
|
||||
But see the next point about keeping it simple. I claim that simple programs look as easy as simple json.
|
||||
|
||||
- Python is 'less safe' than a plain json/yaml config
|
||||
|
||||
But at the moment the whole thing is running potentially untrusted Python code anyway.
|
||||
It's not a tool you're going to install it across your organization, run under root privileges, and let the employers tweak it.
|
||||
|
||||
Ultimately, you set it up for yourself, and the config has exactly the same permissions as the code you're installing.
|
||||
Thinking that plain config would give you more security is deceptive, and it's a false sense of security (at this stage of the project).
|
||||
|
||||
# TODO I don't mind having json/toml/whatever, but only as an additional interface
|
||||
|
||||
I also write more about all this [[https://beepb00p.xyz/configs-suck.html][here]].
|
||||
|
||||
2. configuration should be as easy as possible
|
||||
|
||||
General: as lean and non-verbose as possible. No extra imports, no extra inheritance, annotations, etc.
|
||||
|
||||
Specific: the user *only* has to specify ~export_path~ to make the module function and that's it. For example:
|
||||
|
||||
#+begin_src js
|
||||
{
|
||||
'export_path': '/path/to/bluemaestro/'
|
||||
}
|
||||
#+end_src
|
||||
|
||||
JSON (aided by some helpers to fill in optional attributes etc) satisfies this property
|
||||
|
||||
# TODO would be nice to allow the user to typecheck, extend, etc
|
||||
|
||||
# TODO downsides?
|
||||
# TODO backwards compatible
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
- usable with mypy, TODO imports work
|
||||
|
||||
I'm *very* opinionated about this.
|
||||
|
||||
- as little dynamic stuff as possible
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
https://github.com/karlicoss/HPI/pull/45/commits/90b9d1d9c15abe3944913add5eaa5785cc3bffbc
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
file-config
|
||||
https://github.com/karlicoss/HPI/issues/12#issuecomment-610038961
|
||||
|
||||
no mypy?
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
* Side modules
|
||||
|
||||
Some of TODO rexport?
|
||||
|
||||
To some extent, this is an experiment. I'm not sure how much value is in .
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
One thing are TODO software? libraries that have fairly well defined APIs and you can reasonably version them.
|
||||
|
||||
Another thing is the modules for accessing data, where you'd hopefully have everything backwards compatible.
|
||||
Maybe in the future
|
||||
|
||||
I'm just not sure, happy to hear people's opinions on this.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Loading…
Add table
Reference in a new issue