On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 10:01 AM, jfager <jfa...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 31, 6:02 am, David Stanek <dsta...@dstanek.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 3:19 AM, jfager <jfa...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > "Simply having a configuration file" - okay. What format? What if >> > the end user wants to keep their configuration info in LDAP? Did the >> > library I'm including make the same decisions, or do I have to do some >> > contortions to adapt? Didn't I write basically this exact same code >> > for the last umpteen projects I worked on, just schlepping around >> > config objects? >> >> Ah I see your point here. During PyCon I was trying to add the ability >> to inject configuration into objects that are constructed by the >> snake-guice framework. The code is not yet in the Subversion >> repository, but I did brain dump a little documentation[0]. It is >> still very much a work in progress. >> >> 0.http://code.google.com/p/snake-guice/wiki/InjectingConfiguration > > This is getting close :) I think it would be nice if you didn't have > to come up with your own names (so that projects across different > authors would share more or less the same naming structure), and if > those names didn't encode their expectation of a particular end-user > configuration scheme. >
For my purpose I am writing the glue infrastructure that allows components to be put together within an application. What I am missing is a schema-like way to define configuration files. I have debated starting a project to do that, but at this time I'm already overextended :-) -- David blog: http://www.traceback.org twitter: http://twitter.com/dstanek -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list