On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 05:01:09PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> I remember that in early stages of YANG there was some irrational
> fear of introducing too many namespaces, and submodules may be a
> consequence of it. As you write, submodules provide no benefits
> whatsoever in terms of modularity, but the overhead in terms of
> metadata, IANA registration etc. is pretty much the same as for
> modules.

In case YANG 2.0 is ever done, I suggest someone files a proposal to
remove submodules if the cost/benefit ratio is at odds. There is
nothing wrong with removing stuff that has been found problematic.

The motivation for submodules was that organizations maintaining large
modules with multiple people can do so without having to mess around
with tools like m4 scripts to produce a single module from 'snippets'
and to avoid integration surprises. But perhaps using m4 scripts and
decent version control systems (that can integrate and compile on
checkin) is indeed cheaper than having submodules part of the YANG
language itself.


Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>

netmod mailing list

Reply via email to