4 ms·

Acornfiles? I feel like when you introduce a new config format, a common expectation will be having a prominent "Why Acornfiles?" page where you explain why thi

by ttymck 4y ago

Acornfiles? I feel like when you introduce a new config format, a common expectation will be having a prominent "Why Acornfiles?" page where you explain why this new format is necessary. Without it, I personally groan and look away. With it, you are still wasting time explaining your config format, time that should be spent explaining the benefits of the larger system you're offering.

dhsysusbsjsi 4y ago
Exactly this. I groan every time there’s a new yaml config format to learn, develop for and support. It feels like: https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/
- ianbutler 4y ago
  What would you suggest as an alternative? Legitimately curious what people think here.
  - 0xBAADA555 4y ago
    Just use the Deployment YAMLs we already have.
  - stingraycharles 4y ago
    YAML or JSON, mainly just any format that already exist. I don’t understand why a new syntax is required, especially when the ecosystem they operate in (k8s) is already dominated by YAML.
  - cturner 4y ago
    Interface Script http://songseed.org/post/20200607.aa.interface_script.html http://songseed.org/post/20200607.aa.interface_script.html (n-dimension csv)
rockostrich 4y ago
It's JSON with some syntactical sugar. Is that really so bad?
- 0xedd 4y ago
  Yes. There are enough formats out there.
  - tluyben2 4y ago
    In software (unlike many (all?) other fields) there is enough of a lot of things out there; web frameworks, programming languages, crms, content management systems; the list goes on. People feel a flaw of sorts and roll their own. Most won’t get traction and will end up dead on GitHub (hopefully forever though; hopefully archive.org does/will clone all public repos).
ianbutler 4y ago
What do you think is a suitable alternative to custom yaml formats?
- rektide 4y ago
  Inventing new configuration languages to get away from yaml is a blisteringly terrible plan. Yaml doesnt spark joy for me, but it's ok & there's lots of good tools & libraries to support it. Json & toml are basically the only other modestly well supported options out there. This looks like a Yet Another Next Generation (YANG) variant. At least just use YANG. Even though it's vastly less supported. For real, the amount of griping about YAML is unbelievable. It's not great but so what. It does the job. What people really are griping about usually is how much configuration/state is required. Where the spaces go, whether there's parenthesis or not is so far down the list of important factors. Metric miles behind "are there good tools & libraries?," for one.
  - laumars 4y ago
    You can use parenthesis with YAML though. It’s just not a common idiom.
- woojoo666 4y ago
  Why is a custom format needed? Why not just use JSON or YAML?
  - ianbutler 4y ago
    That's totally valid! I don't have an opinion either way. I've heard people complain about yaml before and now seeing a strong reaction to another custom format I was curious to see what people would propose. It would seem however from the responses I've been getting, that though YAML can be difficult or messy it's still better than another custom format.
- jokethrowaway 4y ago
  Toml JSON if you hate comments
tyingq 4y ago
I'm not sure what existing off-the-shelf thing you would use instead. There is some overlap with things like docker-compose, serverless.yml, helm charts, etc. But each of those things is targeting a different use case and/or level of abstraction. So if acorn is also a different use case or level of abstraction, it can't really reuse those formats. Their set of 8 top level structures[1] seems reasonable at first glance to me. [1] args, profiles, containers, volumes, jobs, acorns, secrets, localData
- stingraycharles 4y ago
  I think the problem here is that it introduces a new syntax, not the configuration options itself. Why not just use yaml as a syntax? At the top of the document they already say it’s very similar anyway, I don’t see what this does that can’t be done with yaml? http://docs.acorn.io/authoring/overview http://docs.acorn.io/authoring/overview
  - tyingq 4y ago
    Ah yep. I didn't look carefully, and just assumed it was json, but looking again it's not.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

by ttymck 4y ago

dhsysusbsjsi 4y ago

Exactly this. I groan every time there’s a new yaml config format to learn, develop for and support. It feels like: https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/

ianbutler 4y ago
What would you suggest as an alternative? Legitimately curious what people think here.
- 0xBAADA555 4y ago
  Just use the Deployment YAMLs we already have.
- stingraycharles 4y ago
  YAML or JSON, mainly just any format that already exist. I don’t understand why a new syntax is required, especially when the ecosystem they operate in (k8s) is already dominated by YAML.
- cturner 4y ago
  Interface Script http://songseed.org/post/20200607.aa.interface_script.html http://songseed.org/post/20200607.aa.interface_script.html (n-dimension csv)

rockostrich 4y ago

It's JSON with some syntactical sugar. Is that really so bad?

0xedd 4y ago
Yes. There are enough formats out there.
- tluyben2 4y ago
  In software (unlike many (all?) other fields) there is enough of a lot of things out there; web frameworks, programming languages, crms, content management systems; the list goes on. People feel a flaw of sorts and roll their own. Most won’t get traction and will end up dead on GitHub (hopefully forever though; hopefully archive.org does/will clone all public repos).

ianbutler 4y ago

What do you think is a suitable alternative to custom yaml formats?

rektide 4y ago
Inventing new configuration languages to get away from yaml is a blisteringly terrible plan. Yaml doesnt spark joy for me, but it's ok & there's lots of good tools & libraries to support it. Json & toml are basically the only other modestly well supported options out there. This looks like a Yet Another Next Generation (YANG) variant. At least just use YANG. Even though it's vastly less supported. For real, the amount of griping about YAML is unbelievable. It's not great but so what. It does the job. What people really are griping about usually is how much configuration/state is required. Where the spaces go, whether there's parenthesis or not is so far down the list of important factors. Metric miles behind "are there good tools & libraries?," for one.
- laumars 4y ago
  You can use parenthesis with YAML though. It’s just not a common idiom.
woojoo666 4y ago
Why is a custom format needed? Why not just use JSON or YAML?
- ianbutler 4y ago
  That's totally valid! I don't have an opinion either way. I've heard people complain about yaml before and now seeing a strong reaction to another custom format I was curious to see what people would propose. It would seem however from the responses I've been getting, that though YAML can be difficult or messy it's still better than another custom format.
jokethrowaway 4y ago
Toml JSON if you hate comments

tyingq 4y ago

I'm not sure what existing off-the-shelf thing you would use instead. There is some overlap with things like docker-compose, serverless.yml, helm charts, etc. But each of those things is targeting a different use case and/or level of abstraction. So if acorn is also a different use case or level of abstraction, it can't really reuse those formats. Their set of 8 top level structures[1] seems reasonable at first glance to me. [1] args, profiles, containers, volumes, jobs, acorns, secrets, localData

stingraycharles 4y ago
I think the problem here is that it introduces a new syntax, not the configuration options itself. Why not just use yaml as a syntax? At the top of the document they already say it’s very similar anyway, I don’t see what this does that can’t be done with yaml? http://docs.acorn.io/authoring/overview http://docs.acorn.io/authoring/overview
- tyingq 4y ago
  Ah yep. I didn't look carefully, and just assumed it was json, but looking again it's not.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]