[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: pungi, python and the question: where are the python gurus?

seth vidal wrote:
On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 09:15 +0200, Tim Lauridsen wrote:
seth vidal wrote: 
On Tue, 2007-10-02 at 18:04 +0200, Tim Lauridsen wrote:
Jesse Keating wrote: 
On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 14:47:06 +0200
Oliver Falk <oliver linux-kernel at> wrote:

OK, that might be the better fix. But doesn't it make sense
ConfigParser also allows int as values? I mean any kind of number
(int, float, complex) could be handled as string...
I know not the history of ConfigParser and why it's only strings.  I
suspect it's because ConfigParser's primary usage is to parse config
files, and in a file it may be non-obvious how to mark something as an
int/float rather than a string.  The reason pungi uses ConfigParser is
that prior to using kickstart files we had our own config files.  I'm
not entirely happy with ConfigParser, but it'd be something of an
overhaul to switch to some other config system, and not one I was
willing to make at this point.  Maybe during F9...
You can take a look at the config classes in yum (yum/config.py) it
let you define different kind of options types.

I've also made a yum-free config.py that takes all the advantages of the
yum config file w/o needing the yum-ness of it.

you can find it here:

we just used in in func and it's rather handy.


Maybe, it should be out into its own package (python module), so that
potential users could pull it in (yum, func, yumex, pungi etc).
and it could be maintained in one place.


actually I was thinking that maybe we should see about submitting it to
be in python core.


Sounds like a good idea.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]