<div>On 3/29/06, Shane Stixrud <<a href="mailto:shane@geeklords.org">shane@geeklords.org</a>> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> On Wed, 29 Mar 2006, Arthur Pemberton wrote: >> A full ack on this, we would solve a lot of items if we could move >> forward to have a standard lib for all this. But it will be very >> hard to have agreement on how to solve it and even more to make >> projects move over from their current ways. > > I think the process of getting other projects to use this "standard" would > be to put some though into the design and mark multiple backends and > multiple interfaces part of the design. If there are libs, modules, > languages binds, etc with as little dependancy hell as possible, I think > projects will eventually gravitate to this solution. I know I wouldn't roll > my own config parser if there is a perfectly good one already included on my > system , or which can easily be added to any system. I agree design is key here. However our community generally wants no part of discussing requirements and then writing specifications in English. They want actual code... Is there a good case here for gathering requirements and perhaps writing a specification, getting feedback from the major players prior to code being written? Cheers, Shane </blockquote></div>Only case I see here is individual desire. People passioate enough about this need to solve the problem. I and apperently many others simply do not see this as a big enough problem. I am actually suprised by the length of this thread. Don't get me wrong, I see the problem, and I think I understand it. It just isn't a hurdle I run into often. Now, if we were talking about the sendmail conf files.... -- As a boy I jumped through Windows, as a man I play with Penguins.