H Daniel,

I can see a use-case for this, but I have a different solution to the
same problem. I instead would propose tagging programs using a
'groups' attribute:

[program:prog1]
...
groups=group1,group2

The above solution would allow you to do what you are looking for,
while at the same time increasing debugability since it would be less
likely that the same program would be defined for a group in multiple
configuration files.

Comments?

Jens

Sent from my iPhone 5S

11 aug 2013 kl. 00:07 skrev Daniel Bryan <[email protected]>:

> Hello,
>
> I'm using a configuration management tool (Salt) to create entries in
> /etc/supervisor/conf.d for various applications.
>
> I'm running supervisor v3.0b2.
>
> It's logical for each application to have its own config file, to
> simplify generation, deployment and management of the files.
>
> The problem is, I want multiple files to have programs in the same
> 'group', like this:
>
>    #/etc/supervisor/conf.d/audio.conf
>    [group:workers]
>    programs=audioworker
>
>    [program:audioworker]
>    # blah blah blah
>
> And:
>
>    #/etc/supervisor/conf.d/video.conf
>    [group:workers]
>    programs=videoworker
>
>    [program:videoworker]
>    # blah blah blah
>
> This doesn't work - only one of the programs ends up in the 'worker'
> group, with the other one put into a group named for itself, per the
> default.
>
> Is there some way around this without each program having to know about
> the other programs in its config file, and without having a single
> shared file for each config?
>
> If not, is there be any opposition to a patch that provides for this?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Daniel
> _______________________________________________
> Supervisor-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.supervisord.org/mailman/listinfo/supervisor-users
_______________________________________________
Supervisor-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.supervisord.org/mailman/listinfo/supervisor-users

Reply via email to