| 1 |
>>>>> On Sun, 26 Mar 2017, Brian Dolbec wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> I would much prefer for any new files to be created in a format that |
| 4 |
> most languages have data input modules for and are easily read/edited |
| 5 |
> by humans. While this can be read and split easily in python code. It |
| 6 |
> is not future proof for additional data being added and/or removed. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> For the repoman stage3 rewrites. I am moving all configurable data |
| 9 |
> from the code into yaml based files in /metadata/repoman. These files |
| 10 |
> will be easily edited by all developers for updates to banned eclasses |
| 11 |
> and various other values not needing code changes. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> So with a general file name of arches.desc Is there any other data |
| 14 |
> that we want to include in that file? Possibly migrated from other |
| 15 |
> file(s). In that case a dictionary format yaml file might be best. |
| 16 |
> My example below has additional info over what was proposed. |
| 17 |
> It is an example only to show the possible benefit of such a file type. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Please don't. Any such sophisticated file formats don't play well with |
| 20 |
standard Unix tools like grep. Also the file will have have to be used |
| 21 |
by tools like app-emacs/ebuild-mode, and to my knowledge there exists |
| 22 |
no solid parser for yaml in elisp. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
A simple text file with one record per line has the advantage that it |
| 25 |
can be easily parsed in any language. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Ulrich |
Archives