[Zope3-dev] RFC: Use ConfigParser for High-Level Configuration

[Andreas Jung]

--On 5. März 2006 13:56:38 -0500 Jim Fulton <jim at zope.com> wrote:


>> The right way would be to refactor ZConfig and decouple it in a
>> reasonable way from its dependencies.
>
> I think this would be a major rewrite.

Possibly but I don't consider that to be a strong argument for introducing
a weaker mechanism.>

> They have to deal with it now, but now it's really hard.  I think that a
> simpler
> approach would allow much simpler configuration support.  To extend
> ZConfig now,
> you have to create XML schema descriptions, and have deep knowledge of how
> ZConfig works.
>
> Why do you think it's better to have to create a monolithic schema for all
> applications bits that want to use the configuration file, rather than
> letting
> individual applications define how to read their own data independently?

A monolithic schema is of course a problem. I am sure it could be solved by 
refactoring ZConfig.

>
> There could still be frameworks to make handling configuration data
> easier.
>

I agree but I really dislike the idea of flattening a hierarchical 
structure
into a INI-like format. Having /x/y/z as section names looks both funny and 
somewhat unprofessional. The format looks as if would have been invented by 
a first grader. There is no question that ZConfig has the problems you 
described. But I consider such a flat representation as poor and a step back
instead of a step forward (independent of the effort needed to simply and 
refactor ZConfig).

-aj
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope3-dev/attachments/20060305/b49fa638/attachment-0001.bin