You still got my +1 on yaml. I'm wondering about conflating all config files into a huge file. I also wonder about many files, with no evident/apparent structure between files, all scattered around. I suspect I'd lean towards single-file-with-everything if I had to choose today.
U On Wed, 21 Jun 2017 at 12:09 Rich Bowen <[email protected]> wrote: > So, I know I'm not terribly active here, but as someone who has tried to > sell PonyMail to my sysadmins at work ... a HUGE yes to this one. Having > configuration in Lua makes sysadmins turn up their nose at Pony without > ever seriously considering it. yaml is a giant leap forward in terms of > selling it to anybody who has to maintain an instance. The less weird > stuff there is, the easier it is to get it deployed in the real world. > > +1 > > > > On 06/21/2017 12:46 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: > > I'm gonna broach this subject again, but with a twist: > > > > Why not consolidate the two config files into one for a later release > > (after the upcoming 0.10)? > > It would ease the issue of having to maintain the config (only one to > > change if you decide to change ES settings etc). > > > > I'm still in the yaml camp on this - I don't think the compiler error > > argument stacks up. You can just as well do a typo in Lua that won't be > > spotted as you can do one in yaml. They both have syntax that needs to > > be followed, and both allow for humans to enter the wrong thing in the > > right syntax. > > > > Yaml is understood by just about any language, both Lua and Python, > > though I would wait till there's a Python rewrite of the Lua scripts > > before we start switching to a unified config (we could have a simple > > converter for older installations). > > > > I have been toying with a unified yaml for a while, and to me it works > > great. There is currently nothing in the Lua part (or any python > > rewrite) that would require the config to contain actual code, thus > > nothing preventing a switch. > > > > TL;DR: Let's consolidate all the configs into one ponymail.yaml file > > with all the stuff needed. Then you'd only have to edit one file when > > you want to update your configuration. > > > > WDYT? This is merely a discussion on whether people think this is a > > viable goal, we can discuss the actual design of the file later on, if > > there's a majority in favor of this. > > > > With regards, > > Daniel. > > > > > -- > Rich Bowen - [email protected] - @rbowen > http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon > >
