On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 05:01:09PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > I remember that in early stages of YANG there was some irrational > fear of introducing too many namespaces, and submodules may be a > consequence of it. As you write, submodules provide no benefits > whatsoever in terms of modularity, but the overhead in terms of > metadata, IANA registration etc. is pretty much the same as for > modules.
In case YANG 2.0 is ever done, I suggest someone files a proposal to remove submodules if the cost/benefit ratio is at odds. There is nothing wrong with removing stuff that has been found problematic. The motivation for submodules was that organizations maintaining large modules with multiple people can do so without having to mess around with tools like m4 scripts to produce a single module from 'snippets' and to avoid integration surprises. But perhaps using m4 scripts and decent version control systems (that can integrate and compile on checkin) is indeed cheaper than having submodules part of the YANG language itself. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/> _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
