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.

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

Improve configuration management using Features #672

Open
quicksketch opened this issue Dec 17, 2024 · 4 comments
Open

Improve configuration management using Features #672

quicksketch opened this issue Dec 17, 2024 · 4 comments

Comments

@quicksketch
Copy link
Collaborator

quicksketch commented Dec 17, 2024

In last week's meeting, we reviewed Features module for D9/10+ and demonstrated how it can substantially improve the management of configuration in the Mukurtu installation profile. While Features has been substantially less used for deployment now that configuration management exists, the new version is excellent for managing installation profiles and separating config into different module: the common problem that we've been facing.

By switching our current custom modules into "features", we can more easily manage and export configuration into those modules.

@quicksketch
Copy link
Collaborator Author

quicksketch commented Dec 23, 2024

While exporting features, I ran across a strange thing in exporting mukurtu_core module's search_api.server.mukurtu_solr_server.yml config file. There is an inline code comment:

dependencies:
  # Mukurtu devs, remember to delete config dependencies if you re-export.
  module:
    - search_api_solr

Which was helpful because when exporting the feature I noticed a lot of new dependencies being added:

image

I'm not sure why these dependencies are added or why they shouldn't be exported. I'll need to look into that a bit more deeply. For now I'm manually removing these dependencies as the code comment suggests.

@michael-wynne-wsu
Copy link
Member

There's a chance that info is from @brian-wsu since he was doing solr config and testing (also could have been from Steve, but tagging Brian in case he knows!)

@quicksketch
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Thanks! I'm trying to figure out if there's a way we can permanently omit those dependencies. It's going to cause Features to think the feature needs to be exported if it doesn't match the current dependencies. And if we can eliminate one more manual process that will help maintenance.

@michael-wynne-wsu
Copy link
Member

@quicksketch Have confirmed that this was not from @brian-wsu and was most likely from our previous lead dev. So I think you, @nick-deer, and @jonscottwsu can dig into it freely.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants