Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1327952977.1955.160.camel@aeonflux> References: <1327448862-21964-1-git-send-email-scott@netsplit.com> <1327952977.1955.160.camel@aeonflux> Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 13:40:04 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCHv2] autopair: add autopair plugin From: Scott James Remnant To: Marcel Holtmann Cc: linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org, keybuk@chromium.org, hadess@hadess.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 List-ID: On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Marcel Holtmann wro= te: >> + >> + >> +> + =A0 =A0 >> + =A0 =A0 >> + =A0 =A0 >> + =A0 =A0 >> + =A0 =A0 >> + =A0 =A0 >> +]> > > I think we need to have a discussion on this database format first. I > honestly do not like it at all. It does matching and result handling in > a single XML element. That seems like a bad idea. > > And in addition making pin attribute required and then trying to disable > PIN with "NULL" magic is something that I rather not have. > > I am also wondering why this has to be XML and not simple key-value INI > style files. > I tend to agree ;-) The reason it couldn't be pure INI-style (at least, parseable by glib) though is because you then need unique group names for each match, which is equally urgh to write. Scott --=20 Have you ever, ever felt like this? Had strange things happen? =A0Are you going round the twist?