Re: Choosing a configuration format for debimg
On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 10:55:01PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>Julian Andres Klode <email@example.com> writes:
>> In my opinion, the current configuration formats do not fit. Therefore,
>> I suggest to create a configuration format based on XML. This format has
>> the disadvantage that it is not really easy to edit in a text editor.
>> But it also has many advantages compared to the current format in
>> debimg. First of all, the whole configuration could be put in one file,
>> enabling users to share their configurations very easily. Secondly, XML
>> supports an unlimited number of subsections.
>I don't like XML format et all. It is complicated to edit and
>difficult to have a global view of all information on that. I know
>about the flexibility and like but I'd avoid using it.
>I'm much more for a YAML based file, this is easy to read, edit and
Apologies for the long delay - this got lost in my overflowing inbox
for the last month. I'd agree with Otavio - YAML is much easier to
work with for humans than XML.
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. firstname.lastname@example.org
"You can't barbecue lettuce!" -- Ellie Crane