[OpenSIPS-Users] RFC: text pre-processing in OpenSIPS cfg file
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
bogdan at opensips.org
Thu Apr 12 13:48:55 CEST 2012
Hi Ali,
We have not compiled yet the list for 1.9 (it will be published later
after 1.8.0 becomes full stable). Currently we are working in 3 directions:
1) 1.8.0 from beta to full stable - fixing bugs
2) 2.0 - adding async DB support
3) 1.9.0 still planning - mainly a distributed support for usrloc
and dialog modules
Regards,
Bogdan
On 04/11/2012 10:07 PM, Ali Pey wrote:
> I see your argument Bogdan and it makes sense. I agree that this
> wouldn't be a high priority feature. I personally use m4 and will have
> to use m4 since the same configuration file is used for all my
> software components including opensips.
>
> Do you keep of a list of features that you are considering for the
> next release?
>
> Regards,
> Ali
>
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
> <bogdan at opensips.org <mailto:bogdan at opensips.org>> wrote:
>
> Well, it is not only about personal preferences and how is nicer,
> etc...you should consider also the required work to do - at the
> end somebody has to implement this. And my questions is:
> considering that the development resources are limited, does it
> make sense to invest them in just creating an alternative to
> something already existing ?
>
> Regards,
> Bogdan
>
>
> On 04/11/2012 05:04 PM, Ali Pey wrote:
>> Saúl,
>>
>> It's very simple to define a simple text pre-processor. It would
>> be one with only basic text/macro replacement with no fancy features.
>>
>> I can understand that it would make more sense for you to use m4,
>> but I don't understand how this would stop you from doing that?
>> Your personal preference doesn't have to change.
>>
>> It's all about simplicity. It would make it one or two steps
>> shorter, faster and simpler for people that are not quite
>> familiar with m4 or have simple requirements. Not every user is
>> an expert.
>>
>> Ali
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 4:36 PM, Saúl Ibarra Corretgé
>> <saul at ag-projects.com <mailto:saul at ag-projects.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> On Apr 10, 2012, at 6:13 PM, Ali Pey wrote:
>>
>> > I also think it would be a great addition to have a simple
>> build-in text pre-processing. For more advance features
>> people can continue to use m4 as desired.
>> >
>>
>> The problem is the word "simple" on your sentence :-) How do
>> we tell if a feature request qualifies as "simple" or not?
>>
>> For me, the config file is fine as it is. It does have
>> limitations, but m4 helps in solving them.
>>
>> > Regards,
>> > Ali
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:05 PM, Nick Altmann
>> <nick.altmann at gmail.com <mailto:nick.altmann at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> > Against for M4:
>> > Configuration file may not be generated properly from m4
>> file(s)
>> > sometimes (because missed errors in m4), then server cannot
>> start in
>> > some cases. It's when m4 in init.d script. When cfg-file
>> built from m4
>> > manually, it's uncomfortable.
>> >
>> > In my opinion, opensips is the most powerful sip server, so
>> it should
>> > have both options. And users should make decision which to
>> better use
>> > in each case.
>> >
>>
>> You should not attempt to run OpenSIPS with the new generated
>> file before testing it, you may have made a silly typo and
>> the server would be stopped. You can do it in 2 steps:
>>
>> - Regenerate the cfg file from the m4 files and call use
>> opensips -c to validate the config file
>> - Restart the service if the config was valid
>>
>> >
>> > 2012/4/10 Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <bogdan at opensips.org
>> <mailto:bogdan at opensips.org>>:
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > I'm bringing here a discussion started on devel list, as
>> I would like to get
>> > > more opinions on the matter.
>> > >
>> > > The discussion started around the decision if makes sense
>> to have MACRO
>> > > substitution (as text pre-processing) directly in
>> OpenSIPS, considering that
>> > > right now M4 is heavenly used for this (as additional
>> tool to opensips).
>> > >
>> > > So, the debate was : have built-in text pre-processing
>> versus using M4 as
>> > > text processor
>> > >
>> > > Pros for M4:
>> > > - no effort to develop extra stuff - just install M4
>> > > - can do really complex things (more than only
>> macros, ifdef, include,
>> > > etc)
>> > > - you can use it or not
>> > > - easy to integrate with start / stop scripts
>> > > Against for M4:
>> > > - need to be installed and integrated
>>
>> I'm not aware of any system where installing m4 is troublesome.
>>
>> > > - you may have a mismatch for the line number (if
>> errors reported in
>> > > cfg) between the .m4 file and .cfg file
>> > >
>>
>> While this is true, you can look at the generated cfg file,
>> and leaving comments is also a good idea ;-)
>>
>> > > Pros for buit-in:
>> > > - you do no need to install M4 at all (everything
>> comes packet)
>> > > - you may get accurate reporting on errors (for line
>> in cfg)
>> > > Against for M4:
>> > > - more devel work to re-implement macros, ifdef, etc
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Now, I would like to get your opinions on that (you as
>> opensips users), to
>> > > see if we stick to using M4 for cfg pre-processing or
>> there is a real need
>> > > to have this functionality as built-in.
>> > >
>>
>> As I said in the other thread I think that using resources
>> for enhancing the current configuration language is not a
>> good idea. Ideally I'd like to program my routing logic in a
>> real programming language like Python, Lua or Ruby not
>> something totally different which newcomers need to learn and
>> is not a fully blown programing language.
>>
>> M4 is a powerful tool which can be used together with the
>> current configuration language to achieve all the
>> requirements mentioned in the previous mail, without
>> modifying OpenSIPS.
>>
>> Maybe it would be a good idea to use m4 in the sample
>> configs? Having a opensips.m4 file with the main routing
>> logic and some local.m4 file with custom settings like DB
>> configs, etc could help people get their feet wet with m4.
>> Even adding a "opensipsctl reconfigure" command could make
>> sense, it could just do the following:
>>
>> pushd /etc/opensips
>> m4 opensips.m4 > opensips.cfg
>> opensips -c /etc/opensips/opensips.cfg
>> popd
>>
>> So if there is an error you could see it before actually
>> attempting to run OpenSIPS with the change applied.
>>
>> Those are my 2 cents :-)
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> --
>> Saúl Ibarra Corretgé
>> AG Projects
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list
>> Users at lists.opensips.org <mailto:Users at lists.opensips.org>
>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list
>> Users at lists.opensips.org <mailto:Users at lists.opensips.org>
>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
> --
> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
> http://www.opensips-solutions.com
>
>
--
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
http://www.opensips-solutions.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensips.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20120412/ae75eadf/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the Users
mailing list