Jim Fulton wrote:
>
>> It all gives indication. Yes, if only one person says "this sucks",
>> then their opinion may not be worth changing the implementation for.
>> However, if 50% of users said "this sucks", even if they couldn't
>> explain why, that'd be something worth worrying about.
>
> Sure, but how do you fix anything if they don't say why it sucks? How
> do you make it better? How do you even know if they are trying to solve
> the same problem that you are? Or if they've actually tried the tool
> your talking about.
These are all good points and they're the tough ones to answer. I've
often found people are justified in their opinions even if they can't
find a way to communicate the reasons for those opinions...
>>> The ini/config format is pretty standard and, IMO, really quite
>>> adequate.
>>
>> How does it handle nesting?
>
> Using cross-section references. So, rather than having an embedded
> section, you have an option that refers to another section (or
> collection of sections).
I finally get this now :-)
I do still worry about trying to figure out who's using what key (in
terms of config files with sections for more than one type of
configuration in them, as ZConfig provides).
Am I right in thinking the way to avoid this in ConfigParser is to have
one file that references lots of other files? eg:
[config]
logging=logging.ini
zodb=zodb.ini
...etc..
cheers,
Chris
--
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting
- http://www.simplistix.co.uk
_______________________________________________
Web-SIG mailing list
Web-SIG@python.org
Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/archive%40mail-archive.com
