Request opinions on alternate erlang config formats

[Stanislaw Klekot]

On Wed, Apr 01, 2020 at 03:00:52PM -0600, Mark Geib wrote:
> I have been tasked with looking into alternatives to the 
> sys.config configuration for erlang releases that are more
> palpable for non-erlangers. In my group there are non-erlang
> developers that suggest property based key=value configs, and
> others that suggest yaml.
[...]
> So, does anyone use anything other than sys.conf, i.e. the native
> erlang configuration, and if so what do you suggest.??

As a sysadmin who writes code, I suggest TOML.

YAML was my primary choice for configs in the past, but it's a complex
language (somewhat surprisingly), so complex that there are significant
differences in the parser implementations.

TOML is much smaller language, much more regular, has less surprising
edge cases. It's pretty much key=value when you need, but there are
sections and a few data types, so it's handy for more complex things.

> Also, is this really a problem.?? I have no problem with sys.conf,
> but I write erlang and don’t get squeamish looking at nested braces.

Well, I write configs in many different formats (and code in many
diffrent languages), one more won't give me a headache, but there people
who absolutely refuse to learn something else no matter what.

-- 
Stanislaw Klekot