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

Where bot configs should be stored in repo? #368

Closed
SYNchroACK opened this issue Oct 8, 2015 · 5 comments · Fixed by #1751
Closed

Where bot configs should be stored in repo? #368

SYNchroACK opened this issue Oct 8, 2015 · 5 comments · Fixed by #1751
Labels
architecture documentation Indicates a need for improvements or additions to documentation feature Indicates new feature requests or new features

Comments

@SYNchroACK
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@SYNchroACK SYNchroACK added the feature Indicates new feature requests or new features label Oct 8, 2015
@SYNchroACK SYNchroACK added this to the Release 1 milestone Oct 8, 2015
@sebix
Copy link
Member

sebix commented Oct 8, 2015

I assume this question arose as the docs are now centralized in a separate combined file?

@SYNchroACK
Copy link
Contributor Author

The following information represents an example of what we discussed

Modify Expert Bot


Files location in repository:

  • bot documentation: intelmq/bots/experts/modify/modify.md
  • bot config: intelmq/bots/experts/modify/modify.conf

Files location in installation folder:

  • bot documentation: /opt/intelmq/docs/bots/modify.md
  • bot config: /opt/intelmq/conf/bots/modify.conf

Is it ok?

NOTE: this information should be available in DevelopersGuide

@sebix
Copy link
Member

sebix commented Oct 13, 2015

Yes, I'm fine with it.

@sebix sebix added the documentation Indicates a need for improvements or additions to documentation label Feb 3, 2016
@sebix sebix changed the title ENH: where bot configs should be stored in repo? DOC: where bot configs should be stored in repo? Feb 16, 2016
@sebix sebix self-assigned this Feb 16, 2016
@sebix sebix changed the title DOC: where bot configs should be stored in repo? Where bot configs should be stored in repo? Apr 5, 2016
@aaronkaplan aaronkaplan modified the milestones: Release v1.1, Release v1.0 Jul 25, 2016
@bernhardreiter
Copy link
Contributor

bernhardreiter commented Sep 27, 2016

For completeness: I also believe that the documentation for a bot should be close to the code (and the default config, and the test code for this bot, see #552), generally a bot directory should contain everything.

A technical remark: an alternative to intelmq/bots/experts/modify/modify.md is intelmq/bots/experts/modify/README.md making it easier to collect the documentation.

@sebix
Copy link
Member

sebix commented Sep 27, 2016

On 09/27/2016 08:36 AM, Bernhard E. Reiter wrote:

For completeness: I also believe that the documentation for a bot
should be close to the code (and the default config, and the test code
for this bot), generally a bot directory should contain everything.

Also makes a separation of bots easier.

A technical remark: an alternative to
|intelmq/bots/experts/modify/modify.md| is
|intelmq/bots/experts/modify/README.md| making it easier to collect
the documentation.

ACK

@sebix sebix assigned ghost and unassigned sebix Jan 16, 2017
@SYNchroACK SYNchroACK self-assigned this Feb 1, 2017
@ghost ghost modified the milestones: 1.1.0, 1.2.0 Jun 28, 2018
@ghost ghost modified the milestones: 1.2.0, 2.0.0, 2.1.0 Apr 9, 2019
@ghost ghost modified the milestones: 2.1.0, 2.2.0 Oct 25, 2019
@ghost ghost removed this from the 2.2.0 milestone Jun 17, 2020
@ghost ghost unassigned SYNchroACK and ghost Jul 15, 2020
@ghost ghost closed this as completed in #1751 Mar 15, 2021
This issue was closed.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
architecture documentation Indicates a need for improvements or additions to documentation feature Indicates new feature requests or new features
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants