Hi all, In my experience I have thought of environments as dependent on the project because I have always had some project specific variable in the environment. After all, an environment is nothing more than a group of configuration files and it is the latter that contain useful information. These can then be reused in different environments or projects and give the necessary flexibility. It is always these files that are listed for execution with Docker and define the execution environment.
Peter mentioned parent projects which are useful for reuse of metadata objects, but I don't see (wrongly?) how to use them to inherit environments. Cheers Enrico ----- Messaggio originale ----- Da: "sergio ramazzina" <[email protected]> A: "dev" <[email protected]> Inviato: Martedì, 2 novembre 2021 14:22:38 Oggetto: Re: Environments linked to projects or not Hi all, I expressed the same perplexities yesterday in my discussion with Hans, in a short and more succint form, but same perplexities. Peter's email summarize very well my same points of confusion. Current implementation of projects and envronments is also difficult to be explained to our users and developers and they are experiencing our same concerns on this topic. I personally do not understand why and when we could have a use-case for an envronment not associated to a project. What's the case for this, can we make an example? I wasn't not able to find something that convinced me from the very early days Istarted working with Hop. Same pain as Peter with assignin environments' names to different projects. Moreover, really confused on having all the environments present in the environent's combo when a specific project is selected. For this reason, some time ago I wrote an email to this list I sent an email by proposing to hide, by using an option parameter, environments that are not related to the current project. For this reasons I also find more understandable and logical the idea of having a project that is bound to one or more environments with environent's namespace that is per project (so that we can have two environments with same name for different projects). Cheers Sergio Il 02/11/2021 13:09, Peter Fabricius ha scritto: > Hi, > > > > For me, this is also one of the more confusing parts of Hop right now. > > An environment in the current Hop version always has exactly one project > reference in its definition. On the other hand, the names of the environments > must be unique in the context of the Hop installation/configuration. So from > this perspective they have a reference to the local system and not to a > project. Confusing ! > > I find especially the uniqueness of the environment names in the hop > installation/configuration problematic. As long as I only work with my own > system everything is ok, but if projects AND environments are shared between > systems it gets confusing. To avoid duplicate use of environment names on a > target system they should not be Hop installation/configuration specific but > need to have a smaller namespace. > > For these scenarios environments that are bound to one project are much > clearer. > > With the use of parent projects and inherited environments it should still be > possible to have environments that span muiltiple projects, so we are not > loosing flexibility. > > > > Cheers > > Peter > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Hans Van Akelyen <[email protected]> > Gesendet: Dienstag 2 November 2021 09:22 > An: [email protected] > Betreff: Environments linked to projects or not > > > > Hi Hop enthusiasts, developers and philosophers > > I have had an interesting discussion with Sergio on Jira ticket HOP-3471 > > [1] but we would like to get a bit of a broader consensus. > > So the main question is: do we see an environment as something linked to a > single project or are they objects that can be reused for several projects? > Both approaches have pro's and con's but we need to agree on this as it > would change user experience and maybe how they are stored. > > Currently an environment is a semi-standalone object, it is not linked to a > project in the hop-project.json but it is linked to a project in the > hop-config.json. In the GUI all environments are shown, not only the > environments linked to a project. When using hop-run I *think* you can > point to an environment that is not linked to the project in the > hop-config.json. > > My personal preference would be to unlink them completely and have > environments that could be used by multiple projects. This gives greater > > flexibility when you would want to divide your projects on a lower level. > con would be that you would always see all available environments defined > in your hop-config.json. > > I would love for some opinions on the matter so it can be set in stone once > and for all. And we can update our docs to reflect this decision [2][3]. > > > Cheers, > Hans > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HOP-3471 > [2] > https://hop.apache.org/manual/latest/projects/projects-environments.html#top > [3] https://hop.apache.org/manual/latest/projects/index.html#_environments > (null)
