applications' operator-facing options selected #1245

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-07-30 14:22:21 +02:00 by kiara · 3 comments

kiara commented

2026-07-30 14:22:21 +02:00

Owner

As an operator,
I want for Fediversity to have identified what options are relevant for me (rather than for a hosting provider),
so that I may configure my deployments without having to go thru configuration options that aren't for me.

definition of done

per application, we have determined for each configuration option whether it should be operator-facing, or even which role it might be relevant for in our setting, maybe even with a notes column on reasoning, if non-trivial. we could publish this as e.g. csv, markdown, or as new sheets part of (git LFS-based) apps-sheet.
in case the judgement does not differ based on an option sub-module's sub-options, it would be enough to judge for the sub-module in one go, rather than explicitly enumerating its sub-options.
for enums where part of the possible values are of interest, a notes column could elaborate, tho just identifying the option as (partially) relevant would already be okay.

out of scope

different nixpkgs versions (-> if we have a baseline, we could then monitor version differences to get a sense of what may be of interest in a future release)
potential future fediversity applications (#380)

notes

relevant options may be found at either:
- Nix's service modules
- upstream configuration settings (exposed thru Nix's .settings as per RFC42) - JSON-Schema available for at least Peertube, see #627
this ticket may be split up as per the above split and/or by application (so far Mastodon, Peertube, Pixelfed)
informs potential target options to test #195
unblocks #627 (actually exposing the identified options thru our code to wire them up)

**As** an operator, **I want** for Fediversity to have identified what options are relevant for me (rather than for a hosting provider), **so that** I may configure my deployments without having to go thru configuration options that aren't for me. ## definition of done - per application, we have determined for each configuration option whether it should be operator-facing, or even which role it might be relevant for in our setting, maybe even with a notes column on reasoning, if non-trivial. we could publish this as e.g. csv, markdown, or as new sheets part of (git LFS-based) [`apps-sheet`](https://git.fediversity.eu/fediversity/apps-sheet). - in case the judgement does not differ based on an option sub-module's sub-options, it would be enough to judge for the sub-module in one go, rather than explicitly enumerating its sub-options. - for enums where part of the possible values are of interest, a notes column could elaborate, tho just identifying the option as (partially) relevant would already be okay. ### out of scope - different nixpkgs versions (-> if we have a baseline, we could then monitor version differences to get a sense of what may be of interest in a future release) - potential future fediversity applications (#380) ## notes - relevant options may be found at either: - Nix's service modules - upstream configuration settings (exposed thru Nix's `.settings` as per RFC42) - JSON-Schema available for at least Peertube, see #627 - this ticket may be split up as per the above split and/or by application (so far Mastodon, Peertube, Pixelfed) - informs potential target options to test #195 - unblocks #627 (actually exposing the identified options thru our code to wire them up)

kiara added the

type: user story

ambition

configure-applications

labels

2026-07-30 14:22:21 +02:00

kiara added this to the Fediversity project

2026-07-30 14:22:24 +02:00

kiara added a new dependency

2026-07-30 14:22:36 +02:00

#627 applications' configuration options exposed

kiara added a new dependency

2026-07-30 14:22:43 +02:00

#195 NixOS modules' options exposed

Toast was assigned by kiara

2026-07-30 17:45:51 +02:00

toonn commented

2026-08-03 21:06:43 +02:00

Member

Some options may be considered Operator-appropriate or not by different Hosting Providers. We should use a format that could reasonably be customized by Hosting Providers. Though this could be a separate issue.

❤️ 1

kiara commented

2026-08-04 11:41:12 +02:00

Author

Owner

^ c.f. #1189