Second "RFC" on pkg-data idea for ports
Garance A Drosihn
drosih at rpi.edu
Tue Apr 13 14:41:05 PDT 2004
At 11:32 PM +0400 4/13/04, Sergey Matveychuk wrote:
>Garance A Drosihn wrote:
>>But as I thought about adding future features, I ended up
>>with something that looks more and more like XML...
>I really don't understand why you want to use XML-like format?
>I think it may be XML (because of we have a standard) or complete
Well, do not focus too much on whether it is "XML-like".
It is just a format I dreamed up. It does what I want it to do.
If someone has a better format, and a format which will be as easy
for a simple program to process, I will be willing to try that
format instead. I am not too hung up on this specific format.
Note that I do want it to be easy to parse. I felt it might be bad
to drag in a bunch of standard XML-processing libraries, because
then my program will have a "dependency". Given that this program
will be needed to process any port in the ports tree, I thought
it would be a bad idea if the program depended on some library
which was not in the base system. And not just "the" base system,
but in *every* base system that people try to build ports on.
That is what I was thinking of when I picked this specific format.
With this strict, limited format, it should be easy to write a
program that can do all the processing we want to do (at least
Perhaps it is wrong for me to go for a simple format, and this
project needs to do "real XML" so future work can build on it.
It maybe that my simple format is too simple, and too limiting.
If so, then that might also be a good reason for me to table
this project for now.
Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad at gilead.netel.rpi.edu
Senior Systems Programmer or gad at freebsd.org
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih at rpi.edu
More information about the freebsd-ports