View Issue Details
|ID||Project||Category||View Status||Date Submitted||Last Update|
|0006034||Taler||exchange||public||2020-01-07 19:17||2020-12-30 06:03|
|Reporter||Florian Dold||Assigned To|
|Priority||low||Severity||feature||Reproducibility||have not tried|
|Product Version||git (master)|
|Summary||0006034: Exchange should have separate configuration file|
|Description||As discussed in a private e-mail, this has a bunch of advantages:|
* It is easier to validate a configuration, as we can warn about unused sections and options in some sanity checking tool
* Having one file per component makes it easier to generate more complex setups for testing (i.e. two merchants, two auditors, maybe even two exchanges with different currencies)
* We have had configuration section "clashes" in the past, where the merchant parsed a section intended for the exchange, due to the same prefix. Separate files avoid this issue.
|Tags||No tags attached.|
The current exchange has substantially fewer options, a LOT has moved into the database.
Many of the remaining options (like credentials for how to authenticate against the bank) are indeed very tool-specific and in high-security deployments should be in tool-specific files and not some 'global' configuration.
So overall, my feeling is that this bug was always questionable, but now it is even more so.
Florian: Can we just wontfix it?
|2020-01-07 19:17||Florian Dold||New Issue|
|2020-01-07 19:17||Florian Dold||Status||new => assigned|
|2020-01-07 19:17||Florian Dold||Assigned To||=> Christian Grothoff|
|2020-01-17 00:33||Christian Grothoff||Target Version||0.7.0 => 0.9|
|2020-01-17 00:33||Christian Grothoff||Assigned To||Christian Grothoff =>|
|2020-01-17 00:33||Christian Grothoff||Status||assigned => acknowledged|
|2020-01-17 21:40||Christian Grothoff||Priority||normal => low|
|2020-03-28 22:20||Christian Grothoff||Severity||minor => feature|
|2020-07-24 12:07||Christian Grothoff||Target Version||0.9 => 0.9.1|
|2020-12-20 20:29||Christian Grothoff||Note Added: 0017221|