Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan <at> gmail.com> writes: > > On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Tarek Ziadé <tarek <at> ziade.org> wrote: > > On 6/22/12 7:05 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > > I don't understand what's the problem is with ini-style files, as they are > > suitable for multi-line variables etc. (see zc.buildout) > > > > yaml vs ini vs xxx seems to be an implementation detail, and my take on this > > is that we have ConfigParser in the stdlib > > You can't do more than one layer of nested data structures cleanly > with an ini-style solution, and some aspects of packaging are just > crying out for metadata that nests more deeply than that. The > setup.cfg format for specifying installation layouts doesn't even come > *close* to being intuitively readable - using a format with better > nesting support has some hope of fixing that, since filesystem layouts > are naturally hierarchical. > > A JSON based format would also be acceptable to me from a functional > point of view, although in that case, asking people to edit it > directly would be cruel - you would want to transform it to YAML in > order to actually read it or write it.
The format-neutral alternative I used for logging configuration was a dictionary schema - JSON, YAML and Python code can all be mapped to that. Perhaps the relevant APIs can work at the dict layer. I agree that YAML is the human-friendliest "one obvious" format for review/edit, though. +1 to the overall approach suggested, it makes a lot of sense. Simple is better than complex, and all that :-) Regards, Vinay Sajip _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com