Sam Ruby wrote:
>
> Geir Magnusson wrote:
> >
> > I am very pro XML myself. I think think that since the API takes care
> > of all details though, putting everything behind a Repository class, it
> > could be implemented via gerbils...
>
> I'd like to see an instance proof of that myself.
>
> Smart data structures and dumb code works a lot better than the other way
> around.[1]
As a general rule, that's all well and good, but the point is to provide
as part of the API an easy to use class to allow simple access to
repository information abstracted from the data delivery and
representation.
It's much more convenient if I give you a call to get the dependency
list for a package you are intrested in like
public List getDependencyList( String package, String version )
rather than hand you a DTD, and XML file, a list of XML parsers that
might work, and tell you to give it a whack...
At least, I would prefer the former if I was trying to accomplish
something else using the tool.
The relevant context here is that my main focus is not XML vs Properties
vs Gerbils, but getting the functionality of a Repository API in a
lightweight portable way. I am playing with a lightweight SAX parser
now to see if I can switch. It does double the size of things, with no
added API functionality.
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
System and Software Consulting
Developing for the web? See http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/
"still climbing up to the shoulders..."
