use default paths

[wkloucek]

This reverts all path settings to default. This seems more simple and less to break for the example deployments.

For example the current deployment examples do not start properly because of a missing folder structure. Also not everything was persisted, eg. because of missing STORAGE_SHARING_USER_JSON_FILE.

ocis_1     | 2020-12-09T22:27:40Z ERR error starting the grpc server error="unable to register services: rgrpc: grpc service usershareprovider could not be started,: error loading the file containing the shares: error opening/creating the file: /var/tmp/ocis/shares.json: open /var/tmp/ocis/shares.json: no such file or directory" service=storage
ocis_1     | process [storage-sharing] exited with code: 1

Path logic will be also tackled in #1048

[update-docs]

Thanks for opening this pull request! The maintainers of this repository would appreciate it if you would create a changelog item based on your changes.

[jnweiger]

Simpler is better. We now have one ocis-data volume that has everything. that is good.

Do we have documentation that explains the variables that are no longer used in the yml files?
Usage in docker-compose.yml was the documanttion I knew so far.
Can you add a link to that documentation to the yml files, or something similar?

[phil-davis]

@micbar for [docs-only] PRs the unit tests are not run, and so there are no coverage reports and CI does not do SonarCloud analysis. That means that "SonarCloud Code Analysis" is not always "required" for PRs in this repo. But I doubt that GitHub can be told the rule for when "SonarCloud Code Analysis" is required or not.

What to do?

[micbar]

@micbar for [docs-only] PRs the unit tests are not run, and so there are no coverage reports and CI does not do SonarCloud analysis. That means that "SonarCloud Code Analysis" is not always "required" for PRs in this repo. But I doubt that GitHub can be told the rule for when "SonarCloud Code Analysis" is required or not.

What to do?

Yes. there is no condition possible in the Rule.

Was it blocking the merge?

[wkloucek]

@micbar for [docs-only] PRs the unit tests are not run, and so there are no coverage reports and CI does not do SonarCloud analysis. That means that "SonarCloud Code Analysis" is not always "required" for PRs in this repo. But I doubt that GitHub can be told the rule for when "SonarCloud Code Analysis" is required or not.
What to do?

Yes. there is no condition possible in the Rule.

Was it blocking the merge?

Like #1046 this is blocked only by SonarCloud.

[sonarqubecloud]

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
0 Code Smells

No Coverage information
No Duplication information