Re: CMSP 02. Formally switch to YAML Tiny

2009-10-10 Thread David Golden 
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 10:34 PM, Ricardo Signes
perl.cpanw...@rjbs.manxome.org wrote:
 * David Golden xda...@gmail.com [2009-10-09T07:42:06]
 02. Formally switch to YAML Tiny

 Branch available: http://github.com/rjbs/cpan-meta-spec/commits/02-yamltiny

If we only make this change and not JSON, that's fine.

I think a longer section will eventually be necessary to explain
serialization options (if there are any) and what clients are expected
to do wrt to deserialization and validation.

David

Re: CMSP 02. Formally switch to YAML Tiny

2009-10-09 Thread Graham Barr 


On Oct 9, 2009, at 7:11 AM, Ricardo Signes wrote:


* David Golden xda...@gmail.com [2009-10-09T07:42:06]

02. Formally switch to YAML Tiny

Proposal:

Change the language referring to YAML to instead refer to YAML  
Tiny and

update the specification URL to point to the YAML Tiny specification.
(AdamKennedy)


Accept with modification: YAML Tiny should be as the specification for
YAML-like META files, which should be deprecated in favor of META  
files encoded

in JSON.


+1

Graham.

Re: CMSP 02. Formally switch to YAML Tiny

2009-10-09 Thread Steffen Mueller 

Ricardo Signes wrote:

* David Golden xda...@gmail.com [2009-10-09T07:42:06]

02. Formally switch to YAML Tiny

Proposal:

Change the language referring to YAML to instead refer to YAML Tiny and
update the specification URL to point to the YAML Tiny specification.
(AdamKennedy)


Accept with modification: YAML Tiny should be as the specification for
YAML-like META files, which should be deprecated in favor of META files encoded
in JSON.


Certainly, everyone involved in this is aware of this, but let me state 
one time for the record YAML::Tiny minus dumping == Parse::CPAN::Meta. 
This assertion holds now and will in future. For this reason, I am 
*strongly in favour* of defining the YAML-based META files as using this 
subset/dialect of YAML.


As for adopting JSON as the default format: What's the chances of 
including a full JSON parser in core?
IIRC the main reason against including a full YAML parser in core was 
that they're all different and likely broken in subtle or not so subtle 
ways. Certainly, they're all dead-and-wrong or in flux (both of which is 
bad for perl core). I understand this criterion does not apply to JSON?


Cheers,
Steffen

Re: CMSP 02. Formally switch to YAML Tiny

2009-10-09 Thread Ricardo Signes 
* Steffen Mueller nj88ud...@sneakemail.com [2009-10-09T10:04:44]
 As for adopting JSON as the default format: What's the chances of  
 including a full JSON parser in core?

I believe they are good.  JSON.pm has no weird prereqs, works admirably, and
the author has no objections.

-- 
rjbs

Re: CMSP 02. Formally switch to YAML Tiny

2009-10-09 Thread Steffen Mueller 

Ricardo Signes wrote:

* Steffen Mueller nj88ud...@sneakemail.com [2009-10-09T10:04:44]
As for adopting JSON as the default format: What's the chances of  
including a full JSON parser in core?


I believe they are good.  JSON.pm has no weird prereqs, works admirably, and
the author has no objections.


Cool, then count me in. This increases the coreification chances by a lot.

Steffen

Re: CMSP 02. Formally switch to YAML Tiny

2009-10-09 Thread David E. Wheeler 

On Oct 9, 2009, at 6:37 AM, David Golden wrote:

Accept with modification: YAML Tiny should be as the specification  
for
YAML-like META files, which should be deprecated in favor of META  
files encoded

in JSON.


Agreed, assuming JSON is agreed as the spec going forward.


+1m though I have no opinion on switching to JSON.

David

Re: CMSP 02. Formally switch to YAML Tiny

2009-10-09 Thread Ricardo Signes 
* David Golden xda...@gmail.com [2009-10-09T07:42:06]
 02. Formally switch to YAML Tiny

Branch available: http://github.com/rjbs/cpan-meta-spec/commits/02-yamltiny

-- 
rjbs