Hi Willy and Cyril, I just send a new version of the patch. I made some changes following the remarks of Willy.
> > 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. Indeed it should be use with care. But for me it's as dangerous as the '--' option as '--' had clearly been implemented to be used with bash globling. However with '--' the sysadmin can filter himself the files list ; it can't with my patch. > > 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 ? The last point is a very good one I think, swap files can easily be forgotten. The previous ones are more controversial for me as with my patch the directory itself become a configuration "file". If sysadmin put "trash" in it, it's the same as if he put "trash" in a configuration file… it's not haproxy's fault if it fail. However, I agree that we should implement some safeguards. > 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. OK. For me we should add a filter on file name ; keeping only ending with ".cfg" and not starting with ".". I vote for following symlinks, as the implementation currently does. It means less work for me :-) … Joking aside, I don't see any point against it and sysadmins will assume it does except if it's explicitly said in the docs (docs which I should complet regarding this point). -- Regards Maxime de Roucy
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
