Shane Hathaway wrote:
Chris McDonough wrote:

My $.02:  I suspect it might be better to just use XML than configparser
as a ZConfig replacement.  The config format is a stretch under CP due
to the lack of hierarchy.  I'm beginning to think the "don't make admins
use XML" argument should die.  Everybody knows how to edit XML nowadays,
and if you need hierarchy, its familiarity is tough to argue with.

+1.  (Note that Chris did major work on ZConfig, so his opinion should
carry a lot of weight.)


The only thing that matters for me with configuration languages are:

- Examples
- Documentation

If it is standard config files or xml files doesn't matter one little bit.

People that are having a hard time using an xml based config file should really use a graphical interface instead.

Besides, I find it odd to have two different config formats in one piece of sotware. The lines between site configurators and product configurators will probably very rarely be sharp.

--

hilsen/regards Max M, Denmark

http://www.mxm.dk/
IT's Mad Science

_______________________________________________
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to