Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 20:42:21 +0200 From: Benjamin Lutz <mail@maxlor.com> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Cc: Thomas Sparrevohn <Thomas.Sparrevohn@btinternet.com>, Michel Talon <talon@lpthe.jussieu.fr> Subject: Re: DPS Initial Ideas Message-ID: <200705132042.26167.mail@maxlor.com> In-Reply-To: <200705131258.50309.Thomas.Sparrevohn@btinternet.com> References: <20070512004209.GA12218@lpthe.jussieu.fr> <20070513103757.GA33322@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <200705131258.50309.Thomas.Sparrevohn@btinternet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Sunday 13 May 2007 13:58, Thomas Sparrevohn wrote: > Using XML for INDEX are a very good idea mainly because it allows > "ports" to interface in an easy way to external tools - e.g. java > frontends - web browsers etc, etc. However there are drawbacks - Yet > I feel that the discussion about what tool to use as indexing are > completely misplaced if the only point is that somebody likes SQL > better than a directory tree. I'd have said that using XML for INDEX is a bad idea, because INDEX can then no longer be easily processed with any of the tools in the FreeBSD base system. With the format it uses now, I can easily grep, awk, etc it. If you need an XML version of INDEX, it's easy to have just these tools build one for you though. Not to mention that INDEX is already big enough as it is, imo. I don't see why it should be bloated even more with redundant information. Cheers Benjamin [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBGR1wSzZEjpyKHuQwRAo3AAKCSjPk9KNk/bBvLF8DuZ6g9N8xD6wCbBw/I 53yqAAWQB2cJ30jN4KZ2URg= =6Zl8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200705132042.26167.mail>