Each of the configuration uses a (generally different) hand-made format on an ad hoc basis.
(For example, common parameters are written in different formats for individual list settings and for domain or site-wide settings.)
Hand-made formats increase the cost of maintenance.
Sometimes the format is not expressive enough to describe the settings.
Example: scenario files, task files.
Possible Solution
I propose that we move to a format that is as uniform and generic as possible.
Here are some candidates along with their pros / cons:
Lua is not a configuration file in the usual sense, but it would be useful for migrating scenarios and tasks definitions. For the other configuration files, we could choose from the remaining four.
Expected Behavior
The format of the configuration file(s) should be as uniform, flexible, and generic as possible.
Current Behavior
Possible Solution
I propose that we move to a format that is as uniform and generic as possible.
Here are some candidates along with their pros / cons:
Lua is not a configuration file in the usual sense, but it would be useful for migrating scenarios and tasks definitions. For the other configuration files, we could choose from the remaining four.
Planned tasks
TBD.
Related issues
17
1157