[Investigation] Limitations of python-configuration that prevent others from adopting it.
movermeyer opened this issue · comments
I've recently been writing a configuration-loading system for a new library. I was copying the system used by coverage-py.
Now that I've stumbled upon python-configuration and I wonder if it might be a better solution.
I'm writing this issue to document what I've discovered, which might give ideas for the future direction of python-configuration.
coverage-py loads its configuration from a hierarchy of locations, including locations in some shared config files (eg. setup.cfg, tox.ini, pyproject.toml).
A few things make their config loading needs different from what ConfigurationSet currently offers:
- The keys in INI/toml files must have a specific prefix/namespace (
coverage:), in order to avoid colliding with the keys of other libraries in the shared config file - Once a file is found that contains relevant keys, no other files are considered.
- Missing files are ignored
- Configuration options are defined in a schema:
- Values can have types
- Unknown keys are raised as exceptions
- They also have custom type definitions and handlers to parse/convert/deserialize them.
See their documentation or the source for details.
@tr11 , what are you plans on maintaining this library going forward?
@movermeyer , are you interested in forking and co-maintaining with myself if we don't hear back?
@chinghwayu Have you managed to hear back from @tr11 ? Let's not fork unless absolutely necessary.
Unfortunately, I don't have much time to help (I'm already committed to too many other projects right now).
I could do some initial help to get things set up initially, but someone else would have to be the primary maintainer / coder.
@movermeyer haven't heard back
Hey guys, my apologies for the delay getting back to you. Things were a bit crazy at work, but I'm back at actively using and maintaining it.
Great to have you back. Can you push out a release with the recent merges?
Will do! Just need to figure out what's missing on the tests side now to get full coverage