Hi Konrad, Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hin...@fastmail.net> skribis:
> The bigger issue is config.scm - again unrestricted Guile code, like > manifests. That's not good for publishing because we shouldn't encourage > anyone to run unrestricted code from untrusted sources. It’s a conscious design choice to have configuration as code everywhere. The alternative is to define DSLs embedded in XML/JSON/YAML, and we know what this often leads to: feature creep, half-baked semi-general-purpose languages. Of course, using a general-purpose language upfront also comes at a price, as you note. But I think that what it has to offer to users outweighs the costs, and that’s a lesson learned from Emacs. Just to say I’m not willing to replace ‘config.scm’ with ‘config.yaml’, if that’s what you had in mind. :-) So I think we should address the use cases we’ve been discussing without compromising on this fundamental choice that gives users all the power, flexibility, and transparency of a consistent and extensible system. And I’m sure there are ways to achieve that! Thanks, Ludo’.
