[Zope3-dev] Re: RFC: Use ConfigParser for High-Level Configuration
Andreas Jung
lists at andreas-jung.com
Tue Mar 7 12:28:51 EST 2006
--On 7. März 2006 06:51:00 -0500 Chris McDonough <chrism at plope.com> wrote:
> My $.02: I suspect it might be better to just use XML than configparser
> as a ZConfig replacement. The config format is a stretch under CP due
> to the lack of hierarchy. I'm beginning to think the "don't make admins
> use XML" argument should die. Everybody knows how to edit XML nowadays,
> and if you need hierarchy, its familiarity is tough to argue with.
XML as config format must die :-) ZConfig has the right balance between
a stupid INI format and XML.
The weak point at this discussion (as I mentioned earlier) is that we are
discussion about a format and not about a flexible configuration framework
that solves the problems at ZConfig has. The format used at the end to feed
the framework with data is pure syntactical sugar.
The idea to use schemas makes sense especially because schemas seem to
provide everything you need right now. The only thing I have no clue about
is how one would define hierachies through schemas (possibly through nested
schemas)?
Writing a parser for some kind of INI format or ZConfig-style parser is an
engineering task for an average programmer..I think we should discuss the
framework and not a particular format (I agree with Dieter: it's unreadable
and only applicable to small configuration files).
-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/20060307/4200c0f6/attachment.bin
More information about the Zope3-dev
mailing list