From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Sun Nov 15 18:06:43 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68664A2F5C9 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2015 18:06:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yaneurabeya@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ig0-x22a.google.com (mail-ig0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3033F14D0; Sun, 15 Nov 2015 18:06:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yaneurabeya@gmail.com) Received: by igvg19 with SMTP id g19so62734324igv.1; Sun, 15 Nov 2015 10:06:42 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=ywdoR0q6G6BUyb3qJjLCyGVJvzCbWR7FfLvN7+mgqs4=; b=EOfZXFttiKV1MBuLGWEPXPi97PCk7r0s7F4BP1k+g2eviy9wm9VQhnAWauOW3hD0Xw USzIpfYSPabA8wPqUaINZ06oXoy84F4mysyPPWUG1iwv7HFW0WnAHgJOUFupcc9/oaaS W7Yg03oW6rzs4kqjvQVmVRApnsnBmRTbETPPV1peIR7kLjF2ue0LdPrBs9d+jKMuexX4 ZX7gNn23dgdzCI4X8qeMzY9jepObvPfjm4zwP5Em1rvTYwoH7nsceEPuG7cUZGO1gD9I iX1NpOOw9pSpSFOzo/JiMht3cK7zHa4MpA3k52XTyEP3JyVGlDfU6gnO2hKjE1LWHnGe +Uog== X-Received: by 10.50.222.75 with SMTP id qk11mr13145136igc.60.1447610802619; Sun, 15 Nov 2015 10:06:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2601:601:800:126d:5949:ebdc:f5b2:56d8? ([2601:601:800:126d:5949:ebdc:f5b2:56d8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 126sm1857706ion.32.2015.11.15.10.06.40 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 15 Nov 2015 10:06:41 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Subject: Re: libXO-ification - Why - and is it a symptom of deeper issues? From: Garrett Cooper X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (13B143) In-Reply-To: <5648C60B.6060205@freebsd.org> Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2015 10:06:40 -0800 Cc: Adrian Chadd , Dan Partelly , freebsd-current Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <6EDFB74B-2206-46E7-85F7-8DE05FB6D325@gmail.com> References: <0650CA79-5711-44BF-AC3F-0C5C5B6E5BD9@rdsor.ro> <702A1341-FB0C-41FA-AB95-F84858A7B3A4@rdsor.ro> <5648C60B.6060205@freebsd.org> To: Andrey Chernov X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2015 18:06:43 -0000 > On Nov 15, 2015, at 09:51, Andrey Chernov wrote: >=20 >> On 15.11.2015 20:37, Adrian Chadd wrote: >>> On 15 November 2015 at 09:10, Dan Partelly wrote= : >>> Meaning, is that simple to push things in head , if somone does the work= , even with with no proper review of the problem at hand , and the proposed s= olutions ? >>=20 >> Nope and yup. The juniper folk had a solution to a problem multiple >> people had requested work on, and their proposal was by far the >> furthest along code and use wise. >>=20 >> It's all fine and good making technical decisions based on drawings >> and handwaving and philosophizing, but at some point someone has to do >> the code. Juniper's libxo was the furthest along in implementation and >> production. >=20 > It seems it is the only and final argument for libXO existence. I > remember 2 or 3 discussions against libXO spontaneously happens in the > FreeBSD lists, all ended with that, approximately: "we already have the > code and you have just speculations". Alternative and more architecture > clean ideas, like making standalone template-oriented parser probably > based on liXO, are never seriously considered, because nobody will code > it, not for other reasons. We lack a [dtd/json] spec for tools, so programming for xo'ification doesn't= seems like the best idea in the world to me from a end-user sysadmin/develo= per perspective. I could just as easily use standard tools like awk, grep, sed, and more adva= nced languages like perl or Python to parse output, and assuming output does= n't get a major rewrite, I'd just go with that method that's worked pretty w= ell for me over the last 10 years of my career.. Cheers, -NGie=