Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

support for sysctl config file format #829

Open
jsfrerot opened this issue Mar 23, 2020 · 3 comments
Open

support for sysctl config file format #829

jsfrerot opened this issue Mar 23, 2020 · 3 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request question

Comments

@jsfrerot
Copy link

Hi, Would it be possible to add sysctl config file format as describe in the link below?
https://www.rabbitmq.com/configure.html#config-file

Thank you.
@wyardley wyardley added enhancement New feature or request question labels Apr 26, 2020
@wyardley
Copy link
Contributor

My guess is that this wouldn't be trivial / practical until the point where the module drops support for older RabbitMQ versions - otherwise, all the code / templates and tests would have to support both formats.

@TheMeier
Copy link
Contributor

TheMeier commented Nov 5, 2020

Well. Looking at the documentation. The new config format is supported since 3.7.0. This version was released 2017. All other branches are EOL since at least 2018.
So I don't see any point why one shuould not work on a new major version of the module that only supports 3.7.x+. Dropping support for outdated software is often done in voxpupuli modules. E.g. a lot of modules recently dropped Debian 8 and RHEL 6 support. Support for puppet 4 is also long gone from many modules.

The "new" config format is mch simpler and clearer. I would be much easier to maintain and to implement new functionalities.

So why not start the work on a dedicated branch for a new major module version now?

@wyardley
Copy link
Contributor

wyardley commented Nov 5, 2020

Feel free, but the work mentioned in, e.g., #845 would probably have to happen first, and so far, no one has gotten that in a working state. I'm happy to review PRs in a similar vein if someone wants to take a stab at it.

openstack-mirroring pushed a commit to openstack-archive/tripleo-common that referenced this issue Sep 17, 2021
@mbaldessari
Remove /etc/rabbitmq/rabbitmq.conf
049f9a9 
Currently the rabbitmq container image ships the default rabbitmq
ini-based conf file:
$ podman run -it --net=host --rm -uroot undercloud-0.ctlplane.bgp.ftw:8787/tripleomaster/openstack-rabbitmq:current-tripleo sh -c 'ls -l /etc/rabbitmq/'
  -rw-r--r--. 1 rabbitmq rabbitmq 32393 Mar 9 2020 rabbitmq.conf

$ podman run -it --net=host --rm -uroot undercloud-0.ctlplane.bgp.ftw:8787/tripleomaster/openstack-rabbitmq:current-tripleo sh -c 'head -n5 /etc/rabbitmq/rabbitmq.conf'
  # ======================================
  # RabbitMQ broker section
  # ======================================

  ## Related doc guide: https://rabbitmq.com/configure.html. See

In puppet we instead create /etc/rabbitmq/rabbitmq.config and it still
uses the erlang syntax.  See voxpupuli/puppet-rabbitmq#829 for info.
Even though /etc/rabbitmq/rabbitmq.config and its erlang syntax take
precedence over /etc/rabbitmq/rabbitmq.conf, we should prolly remove the
non used config format from the container

Closes-Bug: #1943731

Change-Id: I2b17c3bc930f5964e19c261db65f79593173fb95
openstack-mirroring pushed a commit to openstack/openstack that referenced this issue Sep 17, 2021
@mbaldessari @openstack-gerrit
Update git submodules
96b6ce6 
* Update tripleo-common from branch 'master'
  to 049f9a9659d09248f3b15d4e152de8d9323b6c6d
  - Remove /etc/rabbitmq/rabbitmq.conf
    
    Currently the rabbitmq container image ships the default rabbitmq
    ini-based conf file:
    $ podman run -it --net=host --rm -uroot undercloud-0.ctlplane.bgp.ftw:8787/tripleomaster/openstack-rabbitmq:current-tripleo sh -c 'ls -l /etc/rabbitmq/'
      -rw-r--r--. 1 rabbitmq rabbitmq 32393 Mar 9 2020 rabbitmq.conf
    
    $ podman run -it --net=host --rm -uroot undercloud-0.ctlplane.bgp.ftw:8787/tripleomaster/openstack-rabbitmq:current-tripleo sh -c 'head -n5 /etc/rabbitmq/rabbitmq.conf'
      # ======================================
      # RabbitMQ broker section
      # ======================================
    
      ## Related doc guide: https://rabbitmq.com/configure.html. See
    
    In puppet we instead create /etc/rabbitmq/rabbitmq.config and it still
    uses the erlang syntax.  See voxpupuli/puppet-rabbitmq#829 for info.
    Even though /etc/rabbitmq/rabbitmq.config and its erlang syntax take
    precedence over /etc/rabbitmq/rabbitmq.conf, we should prolly remove the
    non used config format from the container
    
    Closes-Bug: #1943731
    
    Change-Id: I2b17c3bc930f5964e19c261db65f79593173fb95
openstack-mirroring pushed a commit to openstack-archive/tripleo-common that referenced this issue Sep 17, 2021
@mbaldessari
Remove /etc/rabbitmq/rabbitmq.conf
6109c05 
Currently the rabbitmq container image ships the default rabbitmq
ini-based conf file:
$ podman run -it --net=host --rm -uroot undercloud-0.ctlplane.bgp.ftw:8787/tripleomaster/openstack-rabbitmq:current-tripleo sh -c 'ls -l /etc/rabbitmq/'
  -rw-r--r--. 1 rabbitmq rabbitmq 32393 Mar 9 2020 rabbitmq.conf

$ podman run -it --net=host --rm -uroot undercloud-0.ctlplane.bgp.ftw:8787/tripleomaster/openstack-rabbitmq:current-tripleo sh -c 'head -n5 /etc/rabbitmq/rabbitmq.conf'
  # ======================================
  # RabbitMQ broker section
  # ======================================

  ## Related doc guide: https://rabbitmq.com/configure.html. See

In puppet we instead create /etc/rabbitmq/rabbitmq.config and it still
uses the erlang syntax.  See voxpupuli/puppet-rabbitmq#829 for info.
Even though /etc/rabbitmq/rabbitmq.config and its erlang syntax take
precedence over /etc/rabbitmq/rabbitmq.conf, we should prolly remove the
non used config format from the container

Closes-Bug: #1943731

Change-Id: I2b17c3bc930f5964e19c261db65f79593173fb95
(cherry picked from commit 049f9a9)
@kvisle kvisle mentioned this issue Jun 29, 2022
Open
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
enhancement New feature or request question
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@TheMeier @jsfrerot @wyardley