Hi Cyril, On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 10:36:11PM +0200, Cyril Bonté wrote: > Hi Maxime and Willy, > > Le 09/05/2016 11:17, Maxime de Roucy a écrit : > > Hello, > > > > Thanks for your remarks ! > > > > > I think this is a nice addition, it completes well the ability to > > > load an arbitrary file list. > > > > Good to hear that :) > > I'm not sure to like this feature in its current implementation. > I fear it will also create some new issues depending on how people will use > it. > > For example, I know lots of sysadmin who have the (bad) habit to make backup > of the configuration files in the same directory, without cleaning it up. We > may see some directories like this : > > service1.cfg > service2.cfg > service2.cfg~ > service3.cfg.20160509 > service4.cfg-19980101 > service5.cfg > service5.cfg.old > service6.cfg.disabled > > ...and so on. > > When several sysadmins share the same haproxy instance, it can quickly > become annoying. > > Other use cases I immediately see : > - some configurations provide the crt files in the same directory, which > will break things > - some others will store map files in the same directory also > - what about configurations with a README or similar in the directory ? or > swap files because someone else is editing a file at the same time ?
All of these are extremely good points I didn't think about, thanks for raising them! And I can only confirm this, all my haproxy directories agree with you! Thus I think that before going further we should start by trying to define what we want to see and what we don't want. Maybe a solution could be to at least impose a file name extension (eg: .cfg), and I'm not sure it's enough. For example what should we do with symlinks, some will prefer to follow them, others not to. Most likely we should skip all dot files, etc. I think the discussion should go on before we go further with the code. Thanks, Willy
