[Asterisk-Users] What about a higher level configuration language

[Jay Milk]

"fear of the unknown"?  LOL, I know XML quite well.  And yes, it's a
good alternative for the majority of configuration information, but it
is not at all suited for, say, extensions.conf.  Yes, yes, you CAN put
extensions.conf in XML... Just like you can write an industrial process
control in Lisp, water your yard one coffee mug at a time, or drive a
nail with the blunt end of a screwdriver.  Extensions.conf is
essentially a collection of scripts, a set of instructions with a little
data interspersed.  Forcing that into XML is akin to putting your code
in a highly normalized database -- it's possible, but not feasible.
Choose the right tool for the job and don't get hung up on the tool of
the day.

Config files other than extensions.conf are better candidates for XML,
but in some cases trade in maintainability for redundancy (example:
sip.conf and zapata.conf have "sticky" arguments, which allow for
relatively quick and painless configuration of various channel groups).


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Benjamin on Asterisk Mailing Lists 
> [mailto:benjk.on.asterisk.ml at gmail.com] 
> Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 9:04 PM
> To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
> Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] What about a higher level 
> configuration language
> 
> 
> On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 11:50:55 -0500, Jay Milk <jay at skimmilk.net> wrote:
> > XML isn't the magic answer to all questions.
> 
> I didn't say it was.
> 
> >  The configuration
> > "database" for Asterisk is relatively flat while XML supports 
> > hierarchical data much better.  Asterisk's current config file are 
> > better suited to the task than XML inherently could be.
> 
> You are entitled to your opinion, but have you actually tried 
> an XML based configuration system to back this up?
> 
> I wouldn't be surprised if it comes down to innertia and the 
> fear of the unfamiliar. This is what I experienced when I 
> started working on MacOSX where all configuration is XML 
> based. In the beginning I thought "Oh, no, why didn't Apple 
> just keep everything plain text". Yet, after having got used 
> to the XML based property list system on MacOSX, I have to 
> concede that my initial unease was unfounded.
> 
> >From the viewpoint of writing GUI tools to generate and modify
> configuration files programmatically, an XML based system 
> certainly has tremendous advantages. I can tell you that from 
> experience gained from using both XML and plain text 
> configuration bases in GUI configuration tool projects.
> 
> And for those who prefer plain text configuration, there 
> would be no harm to have an XML based layer underneath their 
> plain text layer. They need not even be aware of the XML based layer.
> 
> rgds
> benjk
> 
> -- 
> Sunrise Telephone Systems, 9F Shibuya Daikyo Bldg., 1-13-5 
> Shibuya, Tokyo, Japan.
> 
> NB: Spam filters in place. Messages unrelated to the * 
> mailing lists may get trashed. 
> _______________________________________________
> Asterisk-Users mailing list
> Asterisk-Users at lists.digium.com 
> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/aster> isk-users
> To 
> UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>    
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users