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

[OJS] reduce the config file to vital options, and move the other to the database #4687

Closed
Potomac opened this issue Apr 17, 2019 · 2 comments

Comments

@Potomac
Copy link

Potomac commented Apr 17, 2019

Hello,

I am trying with other developers to create a docker image of OJS, and I notice that the config file of OJS (config.inc.php) has a lot of options, which triggers some problems, complexity for the "dockerization" of OJS,

my suggestion : reduce the number of options in this config file to the minimum, a good design is to have a very short config file (8 options, or less), and store the rest of options to the database, by doing this it will allow easier backup/maintenance operations, and also dockerization of OJS about the config file (it will allow us to recreate on the fly the config file with few docker environment variables, when the docker image is launching, instead of using a volume for config.inc.php)

currently for me the vital options for config.inc.php are the credentials for the database (login, password, database driver, database host, database name), and perhaps the base url, the rest of the options could be easily moved to the database in a table "base_settings" for example, and let the admin change these settings present in the database with the administration panel,

check the other CMS like wordpress, they use a very short config file :
https://github.com/WordPress/WordPress/blob/master/wp-config-sample.php

@asmecher
Copy link
Member

For what it's worth: we do already have a candidate table for this -- site_settings.

@NateWr
Copy link
Contributor

NateWr commented Sep 8, 2022

Closing this as outdated. If you feel this is still important, please consider adding to the configuration proposal in the discussions.

@NateWr NateWr closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Sep 8, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants