Robert Greig wrote:
On 26/01/07, Kevin Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm planning on writing this using pure YAML for commons-configuration
soonish
(over the weekend). My plan is to get this into commons-configuration
proper
since they already have a bug open on this
(http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CONFIGURATION-201).
I've looked at YAML briefly and we would still use xml for our java
broker deployments. Operate (i.e. support) teams are familiar with xml
and understand xml. I appreciate that may seem an odd comment to
people who have not worked extensively with operate teams. The yaml
native syntax is not exactly intuitive.
The config file format is not for our benefit but that of our users.
RG
So, I guess it boils down to do we want to use YAML or XML, then. My own goal is
to address the obstacle which is currently blocking me on implementing SSL
configuration, namely no configuration file infrastructure inside the Java
client. Whether that config file is in YAML or XML doesn't matter that much to me.
If I had really, really had to pick, I'd pick XML for two reasons: 1) we've
already got XML config file support built in for the Java broker, and 2) people
are generally more familiar with XML than YAML.
I think we should pick one config file formatting language and use it
everywhere. Having YAML for the Java pieces and XML for C++ pieces (would this
also include the Python and Ruby clients?) is not where I think we want to be.
I've already attached a patch to the JIRA for the Java broker changes. Once we
can agree on one or the other I'll be able to finish the Java client work.
--Kevin
