On Fri, 22 Sept 2023 at 15:37, Sam James <s...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > Alex Boag-Munroe <ni...@qap.la> writes: > > > Any reason for the parseable parts to not be in an established human > > readable/editable format? e.g. the config ini style format, or TOML? > > The only issue really is that depending on how it's done (do we do > it for the whole file, or just comments), it may need a new (profile) > EAPI which will take a while to implement and deploy. > > If it's just for comments, then we can do it immediately though. > > > > > To crib from the OP example with something configparser understands: > > [PREAMBLE] > > Timestamp: 2023-09-21 15:07:42+00:00 > > Author: Arthur Zamarin <arthur...@gentoo.org> > > Justification: Very broken, no idea why packaged, need to drop ASAP. > > The project is done with supporting this package. > > Bugs: 667687, 667689 > > Removal Date: 2023-10-21 > > Packages: dev-lang/python > > > > The format is well documented already and simple to check for > > validity, so any GLEP would just need to cover correct keys/values. > > > > But yeah, I agree it's worth thinking about a proper format rather than > fragile text mangling going into the future. > Perhaps eventually it could/should be used for the whole file but as an interim/beginning there's no reason you couldn't start with comments:
# [PREAMBLE] # Timestamp: 2023-09-21 15:07:42+00:00 # Author: Arthur Zamarin <arthur...@gentoo.org> # Justification: Very broken, no idea why packaged, need to drop ASAP. # The project is done with supporting this package. # Bugs: 667687, 667689 # Packages: dev-lang/python dev-lang/python This simply adds a pre parse step of stripping the comments then feeding directly into configparser or probably more suitable, TOML since TOML has better syntax for directly delivering things like a "Packages:" key as a list. Redoing a bunch of package.* parsing probably wasn't in scope of the OP but I've always wondered and this felt an opportune moment to ask/suggest :) -- Ninpo
