I don’t think the discussion about headers really forces this issue. It’s a technical decision and shouldn’t be rushed.
Regarding the headers. It is straightforward to add headers to existing files. It is also straightforward to use a tool such as checkstyle to enforce them (so, any PR that adds a .hpl file without a header will get a build error, which the contributor will duly fix). In my opinion, Hop should allow multiple formats. XML is rather old, and people find it difficult to read without practice. JSON is a bit more modern, but has terrible support for multi-line strings and (in its official form) doesn’t allow comments and is strict about quoting of identifiers. YAML (or similar) is worth considering; its model is compatible with JSON, it allows comments, it has much better support for multi-line strings, and it tends to diff/merge easier than XML and JSON. Julian > On Jun 12, 2021, at 1:38 PM, Matt Casters <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Folks, > > It's been up in the air for quite some time now but it looks like we're > being forced by certain discussions in the release voting of 0.99-rc1. How > would you feel about moving to JSON for the standard file format of > pipelines and workflows? > I propose .hpj and .hwj as extensions. > This would push back our releases for a month or so while we convert the > remaining serialization code to the new @HopMetadataProperty API > > Cheers, > Matt
