Not to pick on Nico, but its fine if we want to discuss this future evolution
of a classic "not this case", but please get this off of the distribution
for my pending fast-track.

- thanks,

- jek3

Can't resist: Note to Glenn...  I'm sure "bulk update" will be a requirement
for anything we accept.

- jek3

> Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2006 13:52:04 -0500
> From: Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams at Sun.COM>
> To: Bart Smaalders <bart.smaalders at Sun.COM>
> Cc: Rich Teer <rich.teer at rite-group.com>, roger.faulkner at Sun.COM, 
Rod.Evans at Sun.COM, April.Chin at eng.sun.com, gww at eng.sun.com, don.cragun 
at Sun.COM, 
Korn Shell 93 integration/migration project discussion 
<ksh93-integration-discuss at opensolaris.org>, Joseph.Kowalski at eng.sun.com, 
PSARC-EXT at sac.sfbay.sun.com
> Subject: Re: [osol-arc] Re: [ksh93-integration-discuss] libcmd must die 
[PSARC-EXT/2006/561 Timeout: 09/05/2006]
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Disposition: inline
> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.7i
> 
> On Tue, Oct 03, 2006 at 10:56:21AM -0700, Bart Smaalders wrote:
> > Rich Teer wrote:
> > >I can't be the only person who feels uneasy about this trend away
> > >from ASCII config files.  For services/daemons, I get it, but I'm
> > >not convinced when it comes to arbitrary command line programs.
> > >It is too reminicent of Windoze's registry...
> > >
> > 
> > You mean like gnome's configuration info?
> > 
> > The problem with ascii files to control configuration is
> > editing and upgrading.  Designing a robust parser to catch
> > and properly report user configuration errors is often tricky
> > and not done well, and trying to handle syntax changes in config
> > files across upgrades, installation and un-installation of patches,
> > etc, is one of the major causes of package and patch breakage
> > in Solaris.
> 
> These issues, specifically upgrade issues, don't all go away just from
> using XML or what have you though.  The only thing that goes away is the
> need to build and maintain a special-purpose parser.
> 
> > Configuration info needs to be owned by the app and edited by
> > the app, I think.
> 
> Yes.  But CLI and, more importantly, scriptable interfaces should be
> provided, not just GUI interfaces.
> 
> Nico
> -- 


Reply via email to