Re: Subscriptions feature patch
On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Colin Watson wrote:
> Since you wrote your original patch, we have extensible metadata in the
> form of .summary files. I think it would be reasonable to use those
> rather than having a separate file, which will also give you the benefit
> of the I/O functions already existing. However, somebody will have to
> work out the field format: hashes as field values aren't currently
> supported, although there's no reason why they couldn't be made to work.
> Perhaps a one-space indent followed by
> escaped-key+whitespace+escaped-value or something like that would be OK.
My serialization stuff(which isn't in use) supported lol(lists of lists(and
hashes)) in RFC822 format. It might be better to use that, then we can be
more generic(it required a type/format descriptor for vars, to say how to
deserialize them).
I also think the subscription info should be in .summary. It'll be one line
file to parse and keep around(and will save disk space).
Reply to: