Il 15/12/2011 21:04, Jesse Becker ha scritto: >> 3) Maybe connected to the previous problem: the language itself is too >> complicated for beginners. It would be nice to have sort of a simplified >> language (cfScript?), and a compiler to translate it into cfengine3 >> native policies. > > I'm not sure that introducing an intermediate language is a good idea. > Now we have yet another language to learn, and haven't fixed any of the > fundamental syntax problems that already exist.
My point is: the language as it is is a big hurdle, and documentation doesn't help to lower it. To new users, getting into configuration management using cfengine may look like starting to learn C with no previous programming experience. What I am proposing, is to give to those people a chance to start using cfengine using an high-level language. Of course, they won't be able to do everything they could with using cfengine3 directly, but when they'll want to do more they'll find it there and waiting for them. Compare this with other configuration management tools, where you have a high-level language, but if you need more you have to step into the internals immediately (with plugins, with whatever you want, but still: you have to implement things from _outside_ the tool). That's why I think that a cfScript, compiled into cfengine policies, could be a significant asset to get more people into cfengine, and a good educational device if one cares to see how high-level instructions are translated into the low level. E.g.: that JSON-like syntax doesn't fit cfengine's model, but fits a cfScript model perfectly. Ciao! -- bronto _______________________________________________ Help-cfengine mailing list Help-cfengine@cfengine.org https://cfengine.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine
