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

[Max M]

Shane Hathaway wrote:
> Chris McDonough 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.
> 
> +1.  (Note that Chris did major work on ZConfig, so his opinion should
> carry a lot of weight.)


The only thing that matters for me with configuration languages are:

- Examples
- Documentation

If it is standard config files or xml files doesn't matter one little bit.

People that are having a hard time using an xml based config file should 
really use a graphical interface instead.

Besides, I find it odd to have two different config formats in one piece 
of sotware. The lines between site configurators and product 
configurators will probably very rarely be sharp.

-- 

hilsen/regards Max M, Denmark

http://www.mxm.dk/
IT's Mad Science