On Jun 24 11:09, Rainer Gerhards wrote: > On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 10:54 +0200, Jesper Dahl Nyerup wrote: > > On Jun 22 12:23, Rainer Gerhards wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I have now condensed all points brought up and crafted a sample with > > > > > > a) unified parameter names (accepting namespace pollution as a minor > > > problem) > > > b) almost everything expressed by its own param elements > > > > > > The sample is available at > > > > > > http://www.rsyslog.com/download/xml_params_rsyslog.conf > > > > > > I have to admit that it doesn't look as bad as I feared (at least when > > > looking at it with at least simple syntax highlighting). > > > > > > All in all, I think this format could work well enough. I myself do not > > > have > > > any objections any longer against it. Does somebody else have concerns? > > > > > > Please let me know your feedback, > > > > First of all, I think this discussion in itself is very interesting, and > > I completely understand and applaude the ambition of reforming the > > config file format to increase its flexibility, to have a formalised way > > of representing a hierachial data structure, and to ease the parsing and > > validation of its contents. > > > > But. > > > > I just opened the XML example above in my 80x24 terminal, with vim > > without syntax highlighting - contrary to popular belief, XML is NOT > > human readable. I fear, that XML based config files will be a hassle to > > write, a headache to read, and a source of errors when they need to be > > altered quickly. > > You mention many of the same concerns I have, or had. > > Did you also have a look at David's proposal? I guess it got lost in the > vast amount of mail. I have uploaded it to > > http://www.rsyslog.com/download/david_rsyslog.conf > > I think this problem is actually human readable and writable. > > What do you think?
I actually read David's proposal just after i sent my message, and there's no doubt that this example looks nicer. But that doesn't change my opinion on what XML should be used for, and what it shouldn't. I think XML is a great format for simple, diplomatic RPC-mechanisms between systems that need a common understanding of what's valid data and what isn't. I think it's great for my XMPP client talking to my XMPP server, and I even think it's great for representing web pages. What I don't think XML should be used for, is mainly being edited by people (me, anyway) on systems that doesn't provide an editing functionality that aids the user sufficiently in regards to format, semantics as well as the actual content. If some package maintainer from one of the systems I use, decides to create a tool to automatically configure rsyslog, and this tool decides to omit most whitespaces from its generated output, as this is valid XML, the result would be unusable, at best. I know this scenario may be a bit emphasised, and certainly wouln't happen upstream, but the downsides of XML, being a markup language suitable for automatic interaction, makes it unfit for the purpose of config files. This is why I would prefer a format that by design and specification enforces read- and writability. Jesper. > > Rainer > > > > As an equally parsable and standardised alternative, I would suggest to > > take a look at YAML. I think it's far easier to read, just as easy - and > > perhaps a bit quicker - to write, and most of all, I think it's simpler > > to handle on simple-UI systems. And most of the systems where I maintain > > rsyslog, are just that. > > > > I know I'm a bit late to chip in on this, and that a lot of impressive > > work has been done already, but I felt that this should be said anyway. > > Either way, I'm happy about the ambition to continue to support the > > current config format. > > > > Jesper Nyerup. > > > > > > > > > Rainer > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: [email protected] [mailto:rsyslog- > > > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Rainer Gerhards > > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 11:01 AM > > > > To: rsyslog-users > > > > Subject: Re: [rsyslog] feedback requested: NEW rsyslog.conf format -- > > > > XML? > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: [email protected] [mailto:rsyslog- > > > > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Andre Lorbach > > > > > Sent: Monday, June 21, 2010 4:46 PM > > > > > To: rsyslog-users > > > > > Subject: Re: [rsyslog] feedback requested: NEW rsyslog.conf format -- > > > > > XML? > > > > > > > > > > I meant this: > > > > > > > > > > <input name=inp10515 type=imtcp> > > > > > <param id="listen">10514</param> > > > > > <param id="ruleset">remote10514</param> > > > > > </input> > > > > > > > > > > Looks more readable to me as > > > > > <params > > > > > listen="10514" > > > > > ruleset="remote10514" > > > > > /> > > > > > > > > really? Good to hear this, my personal perception is just the opposite. > > > > Of > > > > course, that doesn't imply anything about what is best... Just let me > > > > elaborate that *I* find the first sample less readable because there is > > > > so > > > > much "clutter" around the actually important text. > > > > > > > > > Also another advantage is if you have parameters that contain > > > > linefeeds > > > > > like > > > > > message templates: > > > > > > > > > > <input name=inp10515 type=imtcp> > > > > > <param id="listen">10514</param> > > > > > <param id="template">$foo > > > > > > > > > > $bar</param> > > > > > </input> > > > > > > > > That's a very good argument! > > > > > > > > Rainer > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > Andre Lorbach > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: [email protected] [mailto:rsyslog- > > > > > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Rainer Gerhards > > > > > > Sent: Montag, 21. Juni 2010 15:10 > > > > > > To: rsyslog-users > > > > > > Subject: Re: [rsyslog] feedback requested: NEW rsyslog.conf format > > > > -- > > > > > XML? > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: [email protected] [mailto:rsyslog- > > > > > > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Andre Lorbach > > > > > > > Sent: Monday, June 21, 2010 2:57 PM > > > > > > > To: rsyslog-users > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [rsyslog] feedback requested: NEW rsyslog.conf > > > > format > > > > > -- > > > > > > > XML? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the only argument against XML I can think of is, that syntax > > > > > error's > > > > > > > might happen more often. > > > > > > > But if you see XML as an advanced configuration language, this > > > > > would > > > > > > > be fine. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Besides that I would allow and support multiple methods to > > > > express > > > > > the > > > > > > > parameters like in this sample: > > > > > > > <input name=inp10515 type=imtcp> > > > > > > > <params listen="10514"> > > > > > > > <param id="ruleset">remote10514</param> > > > > > > > </params> > > > > > > > </input> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For having only a few parameters, it is fine to have the > > > > parameters > > > > > as > > > > > > > XML-Node properties, but if you have more than a few parameters, > > > > > the > > > > > > > view is more readable if each parameter has its own XML-Node. > > > > > > > > > > > > I think you mean this: > > > > > > > > > > > > <input name=inp10515 type=imtcp> > > > > > > <params> > > > > > > <param id="listen">10514</param> > > > > > > <param id="ruleset">remote10514</param> > > > > > > </params> > > > > > > </input> > > > > > > > > > > > > But what's the advantage of this over > > > > > > > > > > > > <input name=inp10515 type=imtcp> > > > > > > <params > > > > > > listen="10514" > > > > > > ruleset="remote10514" > > > > > > /> > > > > > > </input> > > > > > > > > > > > > I have to admit that I do not see an advantage, just more text to > > > > be > > > > > written > > > > > > (and IMHO harder to read due to more noise). So I personally prefer > > > > > the > > > > > > paramter approach. Also I don't see why it should become less > > > > > readable if > > > > > > there are many parameters. Isn't that just a matter of how you > > > > format > > > > > the > > > > > > source text? > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe I am overlooking something obvious. I don't have much > > > > > experience > > > > > > with XML... > > > > > > > > > > > > Rainer > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > rsyslog mailing list > > > > > > http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog > > > > > > http://www.rsyslog.com > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > rsyslog mailing list > > > > > http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog > > > > > http://www.rsyslog.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > rsyslog mailing list > > > > http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog > > > > http://www.rsyslog.com > > > _______________________________________________ > > > rsyslog mailing list > > > http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog > > > http://www.rsyslog.com > > -- Jesper Dahl Nyerup Systems Administrator One.com, [email protected] _______________________________________________ rsyslog mailing list http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog http://www.rsyslog.com
