Re: [Dev] [Architecture] [Carbon5] JSON syntax for config files?

[Sriskandarajah Suhothayan]

I think Google Gson[1] is a very good choice here, where its very handy
when converting back and forth between Config Objects & JSON,
with this we don’t need to write the config builder/formatter logic, and it
also supports parity printing JSON.

Suho

[1] http://code.google.com/p/google-gson/

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Srinath Perera  wrote:

> Hi Azeez,
>
> Are we doing the quotes around the variable names or skip them?
>
> e.g.  { "glossary": { "title": "*example* glossary"}
>
> --Srinath
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Afkham Azeez  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Eranda Sooriyabandara 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Azeez,
>>>
>>>
 I am starting a new thread to see how everybody feels about using JSON
 syntax for the config files wer are using. I personally feel that it looks
 elegant, and very easy to edit with vi. Also, we don't do any schema
 validation of our config files, and the config file structures are simple,
 so JSON could be more appropriate.

>>>
>>> 0, Using JSON for configuration files gives an advantage, but is it
>>> worth the effort need to change the documents, migration etc...?
>>>
>>
>> This is Carbon 5. This is where we are doing major platform enhancements.
>> A lot of documents will have to be changed with Carbon 5.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> thanks
>>> Eranda
>>> *
>>> *
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Architecture mailing list
>>> architect...@wso2.org
>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Afkham Azeez*
>> Director of Architecture; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com
>> Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
>> * **
>> email: **az...@wso2.com* * cell: +94 77 3320919
>> blog: **http://blog.afkham.org* *
>> twitter: **http://twitter.com/afkham_azeez*
>> *
>> linked-in: **http://lk.linkedin.com/in/afkhamazeez*
>> *
>> *
>> *Lean . Enterprise . Middleware*
>>
>> ___
>> Dev mailing list
>> Dev@wso2.org
>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 
> Srinath Perera, Ph.D.
>http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~hperera/
>http://srinathsview.blogspot.com/
>
> ___
> Architecture mailing list
> architect...@wso2.org
> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>
>


-- 
*S. Suhothayan
*
*Software Engineer,
Member, Management Committee - Data Technologies Team,
*
* *
*WSO2 Inc. **http://wso2.com
 *
*lean . enterprise . middleware*

*cell: (+94) 779 756 757
blog: **http://suhothayan.blogspot.com/* *
twitter: **http://twitter.com/suhothayan* *
linked-in: **http://lk.linkedin.com/in/suhothayan*
*
*
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [Dev] [Architecture] [Carbon5] JSON syntax for config files?

[Isabelle Mauny]

I am with Senaka on this one. Agreed C5 is a major shift, but what's the
advantage a user has in using JSON for config files ? This would be a huge
migration effort (for them and us) and after those are just, well property
files. Most customer prefer the simple name=value paradigm. Getting them to
edit JSON files for any system property seems a stretch. Would JSON be
script friendly ? Puppet/Chef friendly ?

Also, the target audience for those files are DevOps, not web developers
(reference to the Jaggery discussion before).

Isabelle.

--
Isabelle Mauny
Director, Product Management; WSO2, Inc.;  http://wso2.com/
email: isabe...@wso2.com  - mobile: +34 616050684


On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 4:02 PM, Senaka Fernando  wrote:

> Hi Azeez,
>
> More than docs, we need to consider the user experience aspect. People are
> using these things in real production environments. Some have scripted
> their deployments. How much of an effort is it to move from XML to JSON in
> that sense? I think that's not straightforward. Also, we use XML all over
> the place. Ex:- Synapse Config, Registry Handlers, Lifecycles, Endpoints -
> basically everything configuration across every single component is XML.
> Unless everything becomes JSON, the users have to train themselves to do
> two things. So, what looks cool to us does not look so cool to everybody.
> So, its not just kernel that we need to think about, its the whole
> platform. Unless we have a platform-wide move, I'm -0 for this.
>
> Also, based on the last internal discussion on this, Paul said, "Plain
> JSON is worse than plain XML", IIRC. I thought we agreed for configuration
> files like the LB model in that discussion, but again that would mean
> custom parsers, custom work, and adoption across the entire platform.
>
> Thanks,
> Senaka.
>
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 6:38 AM, Afkham Azeez  wrote:
>
>> I agree on the points everybody has mentioned in support of XML in config
>> files.
>>
>> But it seems that most people still don't understand that Carbon 5 is
>> going to be a major shift. We are removing the Axis2 dependency from the
>> kernel, and minifying the kernel. Lots of things starting from some package
>> structures will be changed. Docs will need updating. From Carbon 4.0 to 5.0
>> is going to be a major leap.
>>
>> Azeez
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 6:53 PM, Maninda Edirisooriya 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I think JSON is more human readable than XML, as it is cleaner than XML.
>>> (I may be wrong as I am familiar with JavaScript) And as Nuwan said we will
>>> not get the "Everything JSON" feeling. But many web developers will be much
>>> familiar with JSON than XML as Jaggery and JavaScript are JSON based. But
>>> there is still a major XML dependancy, that is web services. As all the web
>>> services are still comes with XML, "JSON Everyware" story will not be
>>> complete. So I prefer moving to SOAP based web services to REST/JSON based
>>> system rather than changing configs from XML to JSON. The reason is current
>>> XML configs has no major problem and changing it will course lot of bugs
>>> and support issues. We can postpone this until XML becomes a unpopular
>>> language which will not happen in near future. Until that we can work on
>>> changing message protocols from XML/AXIOM to REST/JSON and improve the
>>> performance and simplicity of the implementation in ESB and AS.
>>>
>>>
>>> *Maninda Edirisooriya*
>>> Software Engineer
>>> *WSO2, Inc.
>>> *lean.enterprise.middleware.
>>>
>>> *Blog* : http://maninda.blogspot.com/
>>> *Phone* : +94 777603226
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Sagara Gunathunga wrote:
>>>


 On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Afkham Azeez  wrote:

> Folks,
> I am starting a new thread to see how everybody feels about using JSON
> syntax for the config files wer are using. I personally feel that it looks
> elegant, and very easy to edit with vi. Also, we don't do any schema
> validation of our config files, and the config file structures are simple,
> so JSON could be more appropriate.
>
> Thoughts?
>


  I'm -0  on this change.

 Other than user friendliness  do we have any significant customer
 related issue to fix by changing  configuration files into JSON ? If not we
 should target to solve significant C4 issues first.  As some people
 mentioned  this needs great amount of documentation and migration tools,  I
 don't believe it's a good idea to do this at the beginning of C5.

 Thanks !




>
> --
> *Afkham Azeez*
> Director of Architecture; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com
> Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
> * **
> email: **az...@wso2.com* * cell: +94 77 3320919
> blog: **http://blog.afkham.org* *
> twitter: 
> **http://twitter.com/afkham_azeez*
> *
> linked-in

Re: [Dev] [Architecture] [Carbon5] JSON syntax for config files?

[Muhammed Shariq]

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 8:32 PM, Senaka Fernando  wrote:

> Hi Azeez,
>
> More than docs, we need to consider the user experience aspect. People are
> using these things in real production environments. Some have scripted
> their deployments. How much of an effort is it to move from XML to JSON in
> that sense? I think that's not straightforward. Also, we use XML all over
> the place. Ex:- Synapse Config, Registry Handlers, Lifecycles, Endpoints -
> basically everything configuration across every single component is XML.
> Unless everything becomes JSON, the users have to train themselves to do
> two things. So, what looks cool to us does not look so cool to everybody.
> So, its not just kernel that we need to think about, its the whole
> platform. Unless we have a platform-wide move, I'm -0 for this.
>

I agree with Senaka too. User experience is going to be an issue once
dev-ops try to migrate from C4 to C5. For example we have a customer who
experienced issue while migrating to C4 simply because we had split our
config files and also moved them to different directories etc. This becomes
more complicated with Stratos setup where dev-ops have written scripts etc
to automate deployment. Obviously there will be changes in configs but
moving from xml to JSON is too much of a leap IMO .. Also we cannot add
comments in JSON based config files (if I am not mistaken), plus even a
JSON based config file is going to look clattered once we introduce nested
configurations.!

>
> Also, based on the last internal discussion on this, Paul said, "Plain
> JSON is worse than plain XML", IIRC. I thought we agreed for configuration
> files like the LB model in that discussion, but again that would mean
> custom parsers, custom work, and adoption across the entire platform.
>
> Thanks,
> Senaka.
>
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 6:38 AM, Afkham Azeez  wrote:
>
>> I agree on the points everybody has mentioned in support of XML in config
>> files.
>>
>> But it seems that most people still don't understand that Carbon 5 is
>> going to be a major shift. We are removing the Axis2 dependency from the
>> kernel, and minifying the kernel. Lots of things starting from some package
>> structures will be changed. Docs will need updating. From Carbon 4.0 to 5.0
>> is going to be a major leap.
>>
>> Azeez
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 6:53 PM, Maninda Edirisooriya 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I think JSON is more human readable than XML, as it is cleaner than XML.
>>> (I may be wrong as I am familiar with JavaScript) And as Nuwan said we will
>>> not get the "Everything JSON" feeling. But many web developers will be much
>>> familiar with JSON than XML as Jaggery and JavaScript are JSON based. But
>>> there is still a major XML dependancy, that is web services. As all the web
>>> services are still comes with XML, "JSON Everyware" story will not be
>>> complete. So I prefer moving to SOAP based web services to REST/JSON based
>>> system rather than changing configs from XML to JSON. The reason is current
>>> XML configs has no major problem and changing it will course lot of bugs
>>> and support issues. We can postpone this until XML becomes a unpopular
>>> language which will not happen in near future. Until that we can work on
>>> changing message protocols from XML/AXIOM to REST/JSON and improve the
>>> performance and simplicity of the implementation in ESB and AS.
>>>
>>>
>>> *Maninda Edirisooriya*
>>> Software Engineer
>>> *WSO2, Inc.
>>> *lean.enterprise.middleware.
>>>
>>> *Blog* : http://maninda.blogspot.com/
>>> *Phone* : +94 777603226
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Sagara Gunathunga wrote:
>>>


 On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Afkham Azeez  wrote:

> Folks,
> I am starting a new thread to see how everybody feels about using JSON
> syntax for the config files wer are using. I personally feel that it looks
> elegant, and very easy to edit with vi. Also, we don't do any schema
> validation of our config files, and the config file structures are simple,
> so JSON could be more appropriate.
>
> Thoughts?
>


  I'm -0  on this change.

 Other than user friendliness  do we have any significant customer
 related issue to fix by changing  configuration files into JSON ? If not we
 should target to solve significant C4 issues first.  As some people
 mentioned  this needs great amount of documentation and migration tools,  I
 don't believe it's a good idea to do this at the beginning of C5.

 Thanks !




>
> --
> *Afkham Azeez*
> Director of Architecture; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com
> Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
> * **
> email: **az...@wso2.com* * cell: +94 77 3320919
> blog: **http://blog.afkham.org* *
> twitter: 
> **http://twitter.com/afkham_azeez*
> *
> linked-in

Re: [Dev] [Architecture] [Carbon5] JSON syntax for config files?

[Senaka Fernando]

Hi Azeez,

More than docs, we need to consider the user experience aspect. People are
using these things in real production environments. Some have scripted
their deployments. How much of an effort is it to move from XML to JSON in
that sense? I think that's not straightforward. Also, we use XML all over
the place. Ex:- Synapse Config, Registry Handlers, Lifecycles, Endpoints -
basically everything configuration across every single component is XML.
Unless everything becomes JSON, the users have to train themselves to do
two things. So, what looks cool to us does not look so cool to everybody.
So, its not just kernel that we need to think about, its the whole
platform. Unless we have a platform-wide move, I'm -0 for this.

Also, based on the last internal discussion on this, Paul said, "Plain JSON
is worse than plain XML", IIRC. I thought we agreed for configuration files
like the LB model in that discussion, but again that would mean custom
parsers, custom work, and adoption across the entire platform.

Thanks,
Senaka.

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 6:38 AM, Afkham Azeez  wrote:

> I agree on the points everybody has mentioned in support of XML in config
> files.
>
> But it seems that most people still don't understand that Carbon 5 is
> going to be a major shift. We are removing the Axis2 dependency from the
> kernel, and minifying the kernel. Lots of things starting from some package
> structures will be changed. Docs will need updating. From Carbon 4.0 to 5.0
> is going to be a major leap.
>
> Azeez
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 6:53 PM, Maninda Edirisooriya wrote:
>
>> I think JSON is more human readable than XML, as it is cleaner than XML.
>> (I may be wrong as I am familiar with JavaScript) And as Nuwan said we will
>> not get the "Everything JSON" feeling. But many web developers will be much
>> familiar with JSON than XML as Jaggery and JavaScript are JSON based. But
>> there is still a major XML dependancy, that is web services. As all the web
>> services are still comes with XML, "JSON Everyware" story will not be
>> complete. So I prefer moving to SOAP based web services to REST/JSON based
>> system rather than changing configs from XML to JSON. The reason is current
>> XML configs has no major problem and changing it will course lot of bugs
>> and support issues. We can postpone this until XML becomes a unpopular
>> language which will not happen in near future. Until that we can work on
>> changing message protocols from XML/AXIOM to REST/JSON and improve the
>> performance and simplicity of the implementation in ESB and AS.
>>
>>
>> *Maninda Edirisooriya*
>> Software Engineer
>> *WSO2, Inc.
>> *lean.enterprise.middleware.
>>
>> *Blog* : http://maninda.blogspot.com/
>> *Phone* : +94 777603226
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Sagara Gunathunga wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Afkham Azeez  wrote:
>>>
 Folks,
 I am starting a new thread to see how everybody feels about using JSON
 syntax for the config files wer are using. I personally feel that it looks
 elegant, and very easy to edit with vi. Also, we don't do any schema
 validation of our config files, and the config file structures are simple,
 so JSON could be more appropriate.

 Thoughts?

>>>
>>>
>>>  I'm -0  on this change.
>>>
>>> Other than user friendliness  do we have any significant customer
>>> related issue to fix by changing  configuration files into JSON ? If not we
>>> should target to solve significant C4 issues first.  As some people
>>> mentioned  this needs great amount of documentation and migration tools,  I
>>> don't believe it's a good idea to do this at the beginning of C5.
>>>
>>> Thanks !
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>

 --
 *Afkham Azeez*
 Director of Architecture; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com
 Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
 * **
 email: **az...@wso2.com* * cell: +94 77 3320919
 blog: **http://blog.afkham.org* *
 twitter: 
 **http://twitter.com/afkham_azeez*
 *
 linked-in: **http://lk.linkedin.com/in/afkhamazeez*
 *
 *
 *Lean . Enterprise . Middleware*

 ___
 Architecture mailing list
 architect...@wso2.org
 https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture


>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sagara Gunathunga
>>>
>>> Technical Lead; WSO2, Inc.;  http://wso2.com
>>> V.P Apache Web Services ;  http://ws.apache.org/
>>> Blog ;  http://ssagara.blogspot.com
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Dev mailing list
>>> Dev@wso2.org
>>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Architecture mailing list
>> architect...@wso2.org
>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Afkham Azeez*
> Director of Architecture; WSO2, Inc

Re: [Dev] [Architecture] [Carbon5] JSON syntax for config files?

[Afkham Azeez]

I agree on the points everybody has mentioned in support of XML in config
files.

But it seems that most people still don't understand that Carbon 5 is going
to be a major shift. We are removing the Axis2 dependency from the kernel,
and minifying the kernel. Lots of things starting from some package
structures will be changed. Docs will need updating. From Carbon 4.0 to 5.0
is going to be a major leap.

Azeez

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 6:53 PM, Maninda Edirisooriya wrote:

> I think JSON is more human readable than XML, as it is cleaner than XML.
> (I may be wrong as I am familiar with JavaScript) And as Nuwan said we will
> not get the "Everything JSON" feeling. But many web developers will be much
> familiar with JSON than XML as Jaggery and JavaScript are JSON based. But
> there is still a major XML dependancy, that is web services. As all the web
> services are still comes with XML, "JSON Everyware" story will not be
> complete. So I prefer moving to SOAP based web services to REST/JSON based
> system rather than changing configs from XML to JSON. The reason is current
> XML configs has no major problem and changing it will course lot of bugs
> and support issues. We can postpone this until XML becomes a unpopular
> language which will not happen in near future. Until that we can work on
> changing message protocols from XML/AXIOM to REST/JSON and improve the
> performance and simplicity of the implementation in ESB and AS.
>
>
> *Maninda Edirisooriya*
> Software Engineer
> *WSO2, Inc.
> *lean.enterprise.middleware.
>
> *Blog* : http://maninda.blogspot.com/
> *Phone* : +94 777603226
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Sagara Gunathunga wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Afkham Azeez  wrote:
>>
>>> Folks,
>>> I am starting a new thread to see how everybody feels about using JSON
>>> syntax for the config files wer are using. I personally feel that it looks
>>> elegant, and very easy to edit with vi. Also, we don't do any schema
>>> validation of our config files, and the config file structures are simple,
>>> so JSON could be more appropriate.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>
>>
>>  I'm -0  on this change.
>>
>> Other than user friendliness  do we have any significant customer related
>> issue to fix by changing  configuration files into JSON ? If not we should
>> target to solve significant C4 issues first.  As some people mentioned
>> this needs great amount of documentation and migration tools,  I don't
>> believe it's a good idea to do this at the beginning of C5.
>>
>> Thanks !
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Afkham Azeez*
>>> Director of Architecture; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com
>>> Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
>>> * **
>>> email: **az...@wso2.com* * cell: +94 77 3320919
>>> blog: **http://blog.afkham.org* *
>>> twitter: **http://twitter.com/afkham_azeez*
>>> *
>>> linked-in: **http://lk.linkedin.com/in/afkhamazeez*
>>> *
>>> *
>>> *Lean . Enterprise . Middleware*
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Architecture mailing list
>>> architect...@wso2.org
>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sagara Gunathunga
>>
>> Technical Lead; WSO2, Inc.;  http://wso2.com
>> V.P Apache Web Services ;  http://ws.apache.org/
>> Blog ;  http://ssagara.blogspot.com
>>
>> ___
>> Dev mailing list
>> Dev@wso2.org
>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
>>
>>
>
> ___
> Architecture mailing list
> architect...@wso2.org
> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>
>


-- 
*Afkham Azeez*
Director of Architecture; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com
Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
* **
email: **az...@wso2.com* * cell: +94 77 3320919
blog: **http://blog.afkham.org* *
twitter: **http://twitter.com/afkham_azeez*
*
linked-in: **http://lk.linkedin.com/in/afkhamazeez*
*
*
*Lean . Enterprise . Middleware*
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [Dev] [Architecture] [Carbon5] JSON syntax for config files?

[Maninda Edirisooriya]

I think JSON is more human readable than XML, as it is cleaner than XML. (I
may be wrong as I am familiar with JavaScript) And as Nuwan said we will
not get the "Everything JSON" feeling. But many web developers will be much
familiar with JSON than XML as Jaggery and JavaScript are JSON based. But
there is still a major XML dependancy, that is web services. As all the web
services are still comes with XML, "JSON Everyware" story will not be
complete. So I prefer moving to SOAP based web services to REST/JSON based
system rather than changing configs from XML to JSON. The reason is current
XML configs has no major problem and changing it will course lot of bugs
and support issues. We can postpone this until XML becomes a unpopular
language which will not happen in near future. Until that we can work on
changing message protocols from XML/AXIOM to REST/JSON and improve the
performance and simplicity of the implementation in ESB and AS.


*Maninda Edirisooriya*
Software Engineer
*WSO2, Inc.
*lean.enterprise.middleware.

*Blog* : http://maninda.blogspot.com/
*Phone* : +94 777603226


On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Sagara Gunathunga  wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Afkham Azeez  wrote:
>
>> Folks,
>> I am starting a new thread to see how everybody feels about using JSON
>> syntax for the config files wer are using. I personally feel that it looks
>> elegant, and very easy to edit with vi. Also, we don't do any schema
>> validation of our config files, and the config file structures are simple,
>> so JSON could be more appropriate.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>
>
>  I'm -0  on this change.
>
> Other than user friendliness  do we have any significant customer related
> issue to fix by changing  configuration files into JSON ? If not we should
> target to solve significant C4 issues first.  As some people mentioned
> this needs great amount of documentation and migration tools,  I don't
> believe it's a good idea to do this at the beginning of C5.
>
> Thanks !
>
>
>
>
>>
>> --
>> *Afkham Azeez*
>> Director of Architecture; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com
>> Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
>> * **
>> email: **az...@wso2.com* * cell: +94 77 3320919
>> blog: **http://blog.afkham.org* *
>> twitter: **http://twitter.com/afkham_azeez*
>> *
>> linked-in: **http://lk.linkedin.com/in/afkhamazeez*
>> *
>> *
>> *Lean . Enterprise . Middleware*
>>
>> ___
>> Architecture mailing list
>> architect...@wso2.org
>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Sagara Gunathunga
>
> Technical Lead; WSO2, Inc.;  http://wso2.com
> V.P Apache Web Services ;  http://ws.apache.org/
> Blog ;  http://ssagara.blogspot.com
>
> ___
> Dev mailing list
> Dev@wso2.org
> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
>
>
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [Dev] [Architecture] [Carbon5] JSON syntax for config files?

[Sagara Gunathunga]

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Afkham Azeez  wrote:

> Folks,
> I am starting a new thread to see how everybody feels about using JSON
> syntax for the config files wer are using. I personally feel that it looks
> elegant, and very easy to edit with vi. Also, we don't do any schema
> validation of our config files, and the config file structures are simple,
> so JSON could be more appropriate.
>
> Thoughts?
>


 I'm -0  on this change.

Other than user friendliness  do we have any significant customer related
issue to fix by changing  configuration files into JSON ? If not we should
target to solve significant C4 issues first.  As some people mentioned
this needs great amount of documentation and migration tools,  I don't
believe it's a good idea to do this at the beginning of C5.

Thanks !




>
> --
> *Afkham Azeez*
> Director of Architecture; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com
> Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
> * **
> email: **az...@wso2.com* * cell: +94 77 3320919
> blog: **http://blog.afkham.org* *
> twitter: **http://twitter.com/afkham_azeez*
> *
> linked-in: **http://lk.linkedin.com/in/afkhamazeez*
> *
> *
> *Lean . Enterprise . Middleware*
>
> ___
> Architecture mailing list
> architect...@wso2.org
> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>
>


-- 
Sagara Gunathunga

Technical Lead; WSO2, Inc.;  http://wso2.com
V.P Apache Web Services ;  http://ws.apache.org/
Blog ;  http://ssagara.blogspot.com
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [Dev] [Architecture] [Carbon5] JSON syntax for config files?

[Samisa Abeysinghe]

How easy it is to manually edit JSON, as opposed to XML?

What tools do we have??

What is the story for DevOps - how are they supposed to do this with ease?

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Amila Maha Arachchi wrote:

> Unable to add proper comments and too many quotes are a big disadvantage.
> People would mess the configs by simply missing a quote.
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Afkham Azeez  wrote:
>
>> The biggest disadvantage I see is that there is no straightforward way to
>> have comments in the JSON file.
>>
>> Azeez
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:59 PM, Nuwan Bandara  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Azeez,
>>>
>>> I remember we were having same kind of a discussion some time back,
>>> but couldn't find the thread :(
>>>
>>> So before jumping to the JSON bandwagon, we have to evaluate the
>>> advantages we are hoping to gain by converting all files to JSON. Dont get
>>> me wrong I like json more than xml but that's mainly because we are using
>>> json effectively in javascript/jaggery. But in Carbon we don't get that
>>> advantage unless we are going to rewrite everything in maybe node (or
>>> something similar).
>>>
>>> For me personally XML is more human readable than JSON, and if you think
>>> about converting config files like identity.xml/carbon.xml etc we will have
>>> to invest some time and carefully design the JSON configs so it is simple
>>> and readable. So compared to the effort do we have enough advantages of
>>> doing this.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> /Nuwan
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Afkham Azeez  wrote:
>>>


 On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Eranda Sooriyabandara >>> > wrote:

> Hi Azeez,
>
>
>> I am starting a new thread to see how everybody feels about using
>> JSON syntax for the config files wer are using. I personally feel that it
>> looks elegant, and very easy to edit with vi. Also, we don't do any 
>> schema
>> validation of our config files, and the config file structures are 
>> simple,
>> so JSON could be more appropriate.
>>
>
> 0, Using JSON for configuration files gives an advantage, but is it
> worth the effort need to change the documents, migration etc...?
>

 This is Carbon 5. This is where we are doing major platform
 enhancements. A lot of documents will have to be changed with Carbon 5.


>
> thanks
> Eranda
> *
> *
>
> ___
> Architecture mailing list
> architect...@wso2.org
> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>
>


 --
 *Afkham Azeez*
 Director of Architecture; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com
 Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
 * **
 email: **az...@wso2.com* * cell: +94 77 3320919
 blog: **http://blog.afkham.org* *
 twitter: 
 **http://twitter.com/afkham_azeez*
 *
 linked-in: **http://lk.linkedin.com/in/afkhamazeez*
 *
 *
 *Lean . Enterprise . Middleware*

 ___
 Dev mailing list
 Dev@wso2.org
 http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev


>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Thanks & Regards,
>>>
>>> Nuwan Bandara
>>> Associate Technical Lead & Member, MC, Development Technologies
>>> WSO2 Inc. - lean . enterprise . middleware |  http://wso2.com
>>> blog : http://nuwanbando.com; email: nu...@wso2.com; phone: +94 11 763
>>> 9629
>>> *
>>> 
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Afkham Azeez*
>> Director of Architecture; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com
>> Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
>> * **
>> email: **az...@wso2.com* * cell: +94 77 3320919
>> blog: **http://blog.afkham.org* *
>> twitter: **http://twitter.com/afkham_azeez*
>> *
>> linked-in: **http://lk.linkedin.com/in/afkhamazeez*
>> *
>> *
>> *Lean . Enterprise . Middleware*
>>
>> ___
>> Architecture mailing list
>> architect...@wso2.org
>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Amila Maharachchi*
> Technical Lead
> Member, Management Committee - Cloud & Platform TG
> WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com
>
> Blog: http://maharachchi.blogspot.com
> Mobile: +94719371446
>
>
> ___
> Dev mailing list
> Dev@wso2.org
> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
>
> Thanks,
Samisa...

Samisa Abeysinghe
VP Engineering
WSO2 Inc.
http://wso2.com
http://wso2.org
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [Dev] [Architecture] [Carbon5] JSON syntax for config files?

[Amila Maha Arachchi]

Unable to add proper comments and too many quotes are a big disadvantage.
People would mess the configs by simply missing a quote.

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Afkham Azeez  wrote:

> The biggest disadvantage I see is that there is no straightforward way to
> have comments in the JSON file.
>
> Azeez
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:59 PM, Nuwan Bandara  wrote:
>
>> Hi Azeez,
>>
>> I remember we were having same kind of a discussion some time back,
>> but couldn't find the thread :(
>>
>> So before jumping to the JSON bandwagon, we have to evaluate the
>> advantages we are hoping to gain by converting all files to JSON. Dont get
>> me wrong I like json more than xml but that's mainly because we are using
>> json effectively in javascript/jaggery. But in Carbon we don't get that
>> advantage unless we are going to rewrite everything in maybe node (or
>> something similar).
>>
>> For me personally XML is more human readable than JSON, and if you think
>> about converting config files like identity.xml/carbon.xml etc we will have
>> to invest some time and carefully design the JSON configs so it is simple
>> and readable. So compared to the effort do we have enough advantages of
>> doing this.
>>
>> Regards,
>> /Nuwan
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Afkham Azeez  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Eranda Sooriyabandara 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Azeez,


> I am starting a new thread to see how everybody feels about using JSON
> syntax for the config files wer are using. I personally feel that it looks
> elegant, and very easy to edit with vi. Also, we don't do any schema
> validation of our config files, and the config file structures are simple,
> so JSON could be more appropriate.
>

 0, Using JSON for configuration files gives an advantage, but is it
 worth the effort need to change the documents, migration etc...?

>>>
>>> This is Carbon 5. This is where we are doing major platform
>>> enhancements. A lot of documents will have to be changed with Carbon 5.
>>>
>>>

 thanks
 Eranda
 *
 *

 ___
 Architecture mailing list
 architect...@wso2.org
 https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture


>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Afkham Azeez*
>>> Director of Architecture; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com
>>> Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
>>> * **
>>> email: **az...@wso2.com* * cell: +94 77 3320919
>>> blog: **http://blog.afkham.org* *
>>> twitter: **http://twitter.com/afkham_azeez*
>>> *
>>> linked-in: **http://lk.linkedin.com/in/afkhamazeez*
>>> *
>>> *
>>> *Lean . Enterprise . Middleware*
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Dev mailing list
>>> Dev@wso2.org
>>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Thanks & Regards,
>>
>> Nuwan Bandara
>> Associate Technical Lead & Member, MC, Development Technologies
>> WSO2 Inc. - lean . enterprise . middleware |  http://wso2.com
>> blog : http://nuwanbando.com; email: nu...@wso2.com; phone: +94 11 763
>> 9629
>> *
>> 
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Afkham Azeez*
> Director of Architecture; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com
> Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
> * **
> email: **az...@wso2.com* * cell: +94 77 3320919
> blog: **http://blog.afkham.org* *
> twitter: **http://twitter.com/afkham_azeez*
> *
> linked-in: **http://lk.linkedin.com/in/afkhamazeez*
> *
> *
> *Lean . Enterprise . Middleware*
>
> ___
> Architecture mailing list
> architect...@wso2.org
> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>
>


-- 
*Amila Maharachchi*
Technical Lead
Member, Management Committee - Cloud & Platform TG
WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com

Blog: http://maharachchi.blogspot.com
Mobile: +94719371446
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [Dev] [Architecture] [Carbon5] JSON syntax for config files?

[Isuru Perera]

I'm -0 on this.

IMHO, we should keep using XML for configuration and focus on other major
enhancements.

I prefer JSON over XML for data transferring, but XML is easier for
configuration files.

May be we can use JSON for Carbon 6. :)


On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Afkham Azeez  wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Eranda Sooriyabandara wrote:
>
>> Hi Azeez,
>>
>>
>>> I am starting a new thread to see how everybody feels about using JSON
>>> syntax for the config files wer are using. I personally feel that it looks
>>> elegant, and very easy to edit with vi. Also, we don't do any schema
>>> validation of our config files, and the config file structures are simple,
>>> so JSON could be more appropriate.
>>>
>>
>> 0, Using JSON for configuration files gives an advantage, but is it worth
>> the effort need to change the documents, migration etc...?
>>
>
> This is Carbon 5. This is where we are doing major platform enhancements.
> A lot of documents will have to be changed with Carbon 5.
>
>
>>
>> thanks
>> Eranda
>> *
>> *
>>
>> ___
>> Architecture mailing list
>> architect...@wso2.org
>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Afkham Azeez*
> Director of Architecture; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com
> Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
> * **
> email: **az...@wso2.com* * cell: +94 77 3320919
> blog: **http://blog.afkham.org* *
> twitter: **http://twitter.com/afkham_azeez*
> *
> linked-in: **http://lk.linkedin.com/in/afkhamazeez*
> *
> *
> *Lean . Enterprise . Middleware*
>
> ___
> Dev mailing list
> Dev@wso2.org
> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
>
>


-- 
Isuru Perera
Senior Software Engineer | WSO2, Inc. | http://wso2.com/
Lean . Enterprise . Middleware

Twitter: http://twitter.com/chrishantha | LinkedIn:
http://lk.linkedin.com/in/chrishantha/
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [Dev] [Architecture] [Carbon5] JSON syntax for config files?

[Afkham Azeez]

The biggest disadvantage I see is that there is no straightforward way to
have comments in the JSON file.

Azeez

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:59 PM, Nuwan Bandara  wrote:

> Hi Azeez,
>
> I remember we were having same kind of a discussion some time back,
> but couldn't find the thread :(
>
> So before jumping to the JSON bandwagon, we have to evaluate the
> advantages we are hoping to gain by converting all files to JSON. Dont get
> me wrong I like json more than xml but that's mainly because we are using
> json effectively in javascript/jaggery. But in Carbon we don't get that
> advantage unless we are going to rewrite everything in maybe node (or
> something similar).
>
> For me personally XML is more human readable than JSON, and if you think
> about converting config files like identity.xml/carbon.xml etc we will have
> to invest some time and carefully design the JSON configs so it is simple
> and readable. So compared to the effort do we have enough advantages of
> doing this.
>
> Regards,
> /Nuwan
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Afkham Azeez  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Eranda Sooriyabandara 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Azeez,
>>>
>>>
 I am starting a new thread to see how everybody feels about using JSON
 syntax for the config files wer are using. I personally feel that it looks
 elegant, and very easy to edit with vi. Also, we don't do any schema
 validation of our config files, and the config file structures are simple,
 so JSON could be more appropriate.

>>>
>>> 0, Using JSON for configuration files gives an advantage, but is it
>>> worth the effort need to change the documents, migration etc...?
>>>
>>
>> This is Carbon 5. This is where we are doing major platform enhancements.
>> A lot of documents will have to be changed with Carbon 5.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> thanks
>>> Eranda
>>> *
>>> *
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Architecture mailing list
>>> architect...@wso2.org
>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Afkham Azeez*
>> Director of Architecture; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com
>> Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
>> * **
>> email: **az...@wso2.com* * cell: +94 77 3320919
>> blog: **http://blog.afkham.org* *
>> twitter: **http://twitter.com/afkham_azeez*
>> *
>> linked-in: **http://lk.linkedin.com/in/afkhamazeez*
>> *
>> *
>> *Lean . Enterprise . Middleware*
>>
>> ___
>> Dev mailing list
>> Dev@wso2.org
>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Thanks & Regards,
>
> Nuwan Bandara
> Associate Technical Lead & Member, MC, Development Technologies
> WSO2 Inc. - lean . enterprise . middleware |  http://wso2.com
> blog : http://nuwanbando.com; email: nu...@wso2.com; phone: +94 11 763
> 9629
> *
> 
>



-- 
*Afkham Azeez*
Director of Architecture; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com
Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
* **
email: **az...@wso2.com* * cell: +94 77 3320919
blog: **http://blog.afkham.org* *
twitter: **http://twitter.com/afkham_azeez*
*
linked-in: **http://lk.linkedin.com/in/afkhamazeez*
*
*
*Lean . Enterprise . Middleware*
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [Dev] [Architecture] [Carbon5] JSON syntax for config files?

[Afkham Azeez]

Standard JSON, where quotes are used where necessary. I wanted to bring
this up again after working with the transmission settings.json file.

https://forum.transmissionbt.com/viewtopic.php?t=6364&p=37460

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Srinath Perera  wrote:

> Hi Azeez,
>
> Are we doing the quotes around the variable names or skip them?
>
> e.g.  { "glossary": { "title": "*example* glossary"}
>
> --Srinath
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Afkham Azeez  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Eranda Sooriyabandara 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Azeez,
>>>
>>>
 I am starting a new thread to see how everybody feels about using JSON
 syntax for the config files wer are using. I personally feel that it looks
 elegant, and very easy to edit with vi. Also, we don't do any schema
 validation of our config files, and the config file structures are simple,
 so JSON could be more appropriate.

>>>
>>> 0, Using JSON for configuration files gives an advantage, but is it
>>> worth the effort need to change the documents, migration etc...?
>>>
>>
>> This is Carbon 5. This is where we are doing major platform enhancements.
>> A lot of documents will have to be changed with Carbon 5.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> thanks
>>> Eranda
>>> *
>>> *
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Architecture mailing list
>>> architect...@wso2.org
>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Afkham Azeez*
>> Director of Architecture; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com
>> Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
>> * **
>> email: **az...@wso2.com* * cell: +94 77 3320919
>> blog: **http://blog.afkham.org* *
>> twitter: **http://twitter.com/afkham_azeez*
>> *
>> linked-in: **http://lk.linkedin.com/in/afkhamazeez*
>> *
>> *
>> *Lean . Enterprise . Middleware*
>>
>> ___
>> Dev mailing list
>> Dev@wso2.org
>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 
> Srinath Perera, Ph.D.
>http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~hperera/
>http://srinathsview.blogspot.com/
>



-- 
*Afkham Azeez*
Director of Architecture; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com
Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
* **
email: **az...@wso2.com* * cell: +94 77 3320919
blog: **http://blog.afkham.org* *
twitter: **http://twitter.com/afkham_azeez*
*
linked-in: **http://lk.linkedin.com/in/afkhamazeez*
*
*
*Lean . Enterprise . Middleware*
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [Dev] [Architecture] [Carbon5] JSON syntax for config files?

[Srinath Perera]

Hi Azeez,

Are we doing the quotes around the variable names or skip them?

e.g.  { "glossary": { "title": "*example* glossary"}

--Srinath




On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Afkham Azeez  wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Eranda Sooriyabandara wrote:
>
>> Hi Azeez,
>>
>>
>>> I am starting a new thread to see how everybody feels about using JSON
>>> syntax for the config files wer are using. I personally feel that it looks
>>> elegant, and very easy to edit with vi. Also, we don't do any schema
>>> validation of our config files, and the config file structures are simple,
>>> so JSON could be more appropriate.
>>>
>>
>> 0, Using JSON for configuration files gives an advantage, but is it worth
>> the effort need to change the documents, migration etc...?
>>
>
> This is Carbon 5. This is where we are doing major platform enhancements.
> A lot of documents will have to be changed with Carbon 5.
>
>
>>
>> thanks
>> Eranda
>> *
>> *
>>
>> ___
>> Architecture mailing list
>> architect...@wso2.org
>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Afkham Azeez*
> Director of Architecture; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com
> Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
> * **
> email: **az...@wso2.com* * cell: +94 77 3320919
> blog: **http://blog.afkham.org* *
> twitter: **http://twitter.com/afkham_azeez*
> *
> linked-in: **http://lk.linkedin.com/in/afkhamazeez*
> *
> *
> *Lean . Enterprise . Middleware*
>
> ___
> Dev mailing list
> Dev@wso2.org
> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
>
>


-- 

Srinath Perera, Ph.D.
   http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~hperera/
   http://srinathsview.blogspot.com/
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [Dev] [Architecture] [Carbon5] JSON syntax for config files?

[Nuwan Bandara]

Hi Azeez,

I remember we were having same kind of a discussion some time back,
but couldn't find the thread :(

So before jumping to the JSON bandwagon, we have to evaluate the advantages
we are hoping to gain by converting all files to JSON. Dont get me wrong I
like json more than xml but that's mainly because we are using
json effectively in javascript/jaggery. But in Carbon we don't get that
advantage unless we are going to rewrite everything in maybe node (or
something similar).

For me personally XML is more human readable than JSON, and if you think
about converting config files like identity.xml/carbon.xml etc we will have
to invest some time and carefully design the JSON configs so it is simple
and readable. So compared to the effort do we have enough advantages of
doing this.

Regards,
/Nuwan


On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Afkham Azeez  wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Eranda Sooriyabandara wrote:
>
>> Hi Azeez,
>>
>>
>>> I am starting a new thread to see how everybody feels about using JSON
>>> syntax for the config files wer are using. I personally feel that it looks
>>> elegant, and very easy to edit with vi. Also, we don't do any schema
>>> validation of our config files, and the config file structures are simple,
>>> so JSON could be more appropriate.
>>>
>>
>> 0, Using JSON for configuration files gives an advantage, but is it worth
>> the effort need to change the documents, migration etc...?
>>
>
> This is Carbon 5. This is where we are doing major platform enhancements.
> A lot of documents will have to be changed with Carbon 5.
>
>
>>
>> thanks
>> Eranda
>> *
>> *
>>
>> ___
>> Architecture mailing list
>> architect...@wso2.org
>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Afkham Azeez*
> Director of Architecture; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com
> Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
> * **
> email: **az...@wso2.com* * cell: +94 77 3320919
> blog: **http://blog.afkham.org* *
> twitter: **http://twitter.com/afkham_azeez*
> *
> linked-in: **http://lk.linkedin.com/in/afkhamazeez*
> *
> *
> *Lean . Enterprise . Middleware*
>
> ___
> Dev mailing list
> Dev@wso2.org
> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
>
>


-- 
*Thanks & Regards,

Nuwan Bandara
Associate Technical Lead & Member, MC, Development Technologies
WSO2 Inc. - lean . enterprise . middleware |  http://wso2.com
blog : http://nuwanbando.com; email: nu...@wso2.com; phone: +94 11 763 9629
*

___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [Dev] [Architecture] [Carbon5] JSON syntax for config files?

[Afkham Azeez]

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Eranda Sooriyabandara wrote:

> Hi Azeez,
>
>
>> I am starting a new thread to see how everybody feels about using JSON
>> syntax for the config files wer are using. I personally feel that it looks
>> elegant, and very easy to edit with vi. Also, we don't do any schema
>> validation of our config files, and the config file structures are simple,
>> so JSON could be more appropriate.
>>
>
> 0, Using JSON for configuration files gives an advantage, but is it worth
> the effort need to change the documents, migration etc...?
>

This is Carbon 5. This is where we are doing major platform enhancements. A
lot of documents will have to be changed with Carbon 5.


>
> thanks
> Eranda
> *
> *
>
> ___
> Architecture mailing list
> architect...@wso2.org
> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>
>


-- 
*Afkham Azeez*
Director of Architecture; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com
Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
* **
email: **az...@wso2.com* * cell: +94 77 3320919
blog: **http://blog.afkham.org* *
twitter: **http://twitter.com/afkham_azeez*
*
linked-in: **http://lk.linkedin.com/in/afkhamazeez*
*
*
*Lean . Enterprise . Middleware*
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [Dev] [Architecture] [Carbon5] JSON syntax for config files?

[Eranda Sooriyabandara]

Hi Azeez,


> I am starting a new thread to see how everybody feels about using JSON
> syntax for the config files wer are using. I personally feel that it looks
> elegant, and very easy to edit with vi. Also, we don't do any schema
> validation of our config files, and the config file structures are simple,
> so JSON could be more appropriate.
>

0, Using JSON for configuration files gives an advantage, but is it worth
the effort need to change the documents, migration etc...?

thanks
Eranda
*
*
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [Dev] [Architecture] [Carbon5] JSON syntax for config files?

[Pradeep Fernando]

I'm +1 ,though i like xml attribute based config files as well. ;)

we have to push the change across all config files in the platform, as much
as we can.


On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Afkham Azeez  wrote:

> Folks,
> I am starting a new thread to see how everybody feels about using JSON
> syntax for the config files wer are using. I personally feel that it looks
> elegant, and very easy to edit with vi. Also, we don't do any schema
> validation of our config files, and the config file structures are simple,
> so JSON could be more appropriate.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> --
> *Afkham Azeez*
> Director of Architecture; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com
> Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
> * **
> email: **az...@wso2.com* * cell: +94 77 3320919
> blog: **http://blog.afkham.org* *
> twitter: **http://twitter.com/afkham_azeez*
> *
> linked-in: **http://lk.linkedin.com/in/afkhamazeez*
> *
> *
> *Lean . Enterprise . Middleware*
>
> ___
> Architecture mailing list
> architect...@wso2.org
> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>
>


-- 
*Pradeep Fernando*
Member, Management Committee - Platform & Cloud Technologies
Senior Software Engineer;WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com

blog: http://pradeepfernando.blogspot.com
m: +94776603662
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev