Hi Andrew,
> I can understand wanting to change that and after wrangling with YAIM, I
> can't really see where the "nice interface" is. Linux's "make
> menuconfig" is a reasonably nice interface, autoconf is a "usable
> interface". I suppose YAIM's "interface" is about as nice as really ugly
> Makefile :)
Ok, maybe it is not nice but it is simple.
make menuconfig like solution is one of those proposed to hide xml. I was
quite happy with it - certainly happier than editing xml - however it
might be still unflexible if someone needs to do things differently from
how they are coded. Plus python would be still there. You might be fluent
in python but I, for example, would prefer perl if I had to move away from
bash. In other words the only common language sys admin have is bash and
to be honest is also the most natural to use when configuring. If I
configure a machine for the first time I can just save the command history
and make a script out of it and append it to the kickstart post install.
It wouldn't be so simple if I had to translate the same in perl or python.
> *If* the configuration method for the gLite components is standardised
> across all the components then I don't care how many there are. If I
> have to do totally different things for every different component then I
> will get very mad very fast. From what I can see of the Service
> Confiruation File example at
> http://glite.web.cern.ch/glite/packages/R1.4/R20050916/doc/installation_guide.html,
> most of that service config could be made into about 40 lines (minus all
> the comments) if it were a simple key = value type file.
exactly. This is not simple.
cheers
alessandra
>
>> The people in the pre-production testbed got used to xml+python and had
>> comments only on too many parameters to configure and the xml file in need
>> to be reorganised because as it is is confusing.
>
> If I only have to configure 95% of these parameters once (ie, I can copy
> them between the config for each component) then I'm not too bothered
> about having lots of parameters to configure, as long as they are all
> necessary.
>> Any opinion?
>
> In short, Python - Good/Indifferent, XML - very, very bad.
>
> As an aside, the way that XML has been used in the config files seems
> incredibly broken.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Andrew
>
--
********************************************
* Dr Alessandra Forti *
* Technical Coordinator - NorthGrid Tier2 *
* http://www.hep.man.ac.uk/u/aforti *
********************************************
|