[dev.icinga.com #6080] Remove default settings from config.ini

[icinga-migration]

This issue has been migrated from Redmine: https://dev.icinga.com/issues/6080

Created by elippmann on 2014-04-29 10:13:32 +00:00

Assignee: jmeyer
Status: Feedback
Target Version: Backlog
Last Update: 2017-01-13 11:06:04 +00:00 (in Redmine)

---

As a user I do not want to see default settings in the config.ini because I want to keep my configuration readable, simple and I only want to know what I've actually changed. The web interface however must know of every configuration directive available, but that is not part of this issue. If I ever change a configuration value back to its default via the web interface, the configuration is removed from the config.ini.

Changesets

2017-01-13 10:59:15 +00:00 by nhilverling 1623722

Form: Implement attribute defaultValues

refs #6080

2017-01-13 10:59:27 +00:00 by nhilverling 07372d6

Form: Implement form element attribute ignoreDefault

refs #6080

2017-01-13 10:59:27 +00:00 by nhilverling cba4bad

GeneralConfigForm: Use element attribute ignoreDefault in createElements

refs #6080

[icinga-migration]

Updated by elippmann on 2014-06-06 08:22:14 +00:00

• Status changed from New to Assigned
• Assigned to set to mhein

[icinga-migration]

Updated by elippmann on 2014-06-23 10:12:23 +00:00

• Status changed from Assigned to New
• Assigned to deleted mhein

[icinga-migration]

Updated by jmeyer on 2014-06-30 07:40:40 +00:00

• Status changed from New to Feedback
• Assigned to set to elippmann

lippser wrote:

... The web interface however must know of every configuration directive available, but that is not part of this issue. ...

Shouldn't we add an issue for that one as it's blocking this?

[icinga-migration]

Updated by elippmann on 2014-07-22 13:00:21 +00:00

• Status changed from Feedback to New
• Assigned to deleted elippmann
• Target Version changed from 2.0-4 to Backlog

Hi Johannes,

That the web interface must have knowledge of every available configuration directive is meant as requirement for the configuration forms and not a proposal for a config directive registry.

Cheers,
Eric

Johannes wrote:

lippser wrote:
> ... The web interface however must know of every configuration directive available, but that is not part of this issue. ...

Shouldn't we add an issue for that one as it's blocking this?

[icinga-migration]

Updated by elippmann on 2014-10-28 08:47:23 +00:00

• Target Version changed from Backlog to 2.0-16

[icinga-migration]

Updated by elippmann on 2014-11-21 15:38:59 +00:00

• Target Version changed from 2.0-16 to Backlog

[icinga-migration]

Updated by jmeyer on 2017-01-12 10:21:09 +00:00

• Status changed from New to Assigned
• Assigned to set to nhilverling

[icinga-migration]

Updated by nhilverling on 2017-01-13 11:06:04 +00:00

• Status changed from Assigned to Feedback
• Assigned to changed from nhilverling to jmeyer

[lippserd]

I close this issue as we won't implement this anytime soon.