On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 15:12 -0700, Jeremy Huddleston wrote: > On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 22:19 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > | but I think having the xml configuration files allows a much more > > | robust configuration. > > > > How so? Using XML doesn't magically make your data files any different. > > It simply makes them much harder to parse. > > That's a matter of opinion. I see it as a way to abstract away the > configuration and utilize an existing library to handle the parsing. If > we do want to eliminate outside dependencies (which I think is an > extremely valid point and concern), then we could internally implement a > different configuration format that is easier to parse. I'd probably go > for something similar to the samba/gdm config files if we were to go > down this road:
<snip> I've always been a fan of samba style config files..unlike xml they tend to be both easy to parse and are human readable. I'd far rather see this over XML. It's especially attractive as this is also the way that portage is moving (at the moment) as well. --Dan -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
