[vz-dev] RFC: new config format for vzlogger
info at steffenvogel.de
Sun Oct 9 09:28:09 CEST 2011
thanks Justin to start this discussion. I think the Apache like
configuration format has several advantages:
* obvious "1:n" relationship between meters and channels
* we clearly seperate meter settings like interval, port, protocol from
channel settings like uuid, middleware etc.
* we do not have to rely on a fixed format. Its easly extensible
* with long middleware urls and uuids the old format mostly is longer
than 80 chars
* more people are familiar with apache/proftpd like configuration files
Do you have any cons?
There is propable one:
* its harder to implement
Am Sonntag, den 09.10.2011, 01:30 +0200 schrieb Justin Otherguy:
> Hi there,
> the current format for vzlogger.conf has all information for a channel in a separate line, like this:
> ;prot middleware uuid connection intval options
> onewire http://demo.volkszaehler.org/middleware.php <uuid> /mnt/1wire/10.12E6D3000800/temperature 10
> d0 http://volkszaehler.org/demo/middleware.php <uuid> /dev/ttyUSB2 1-0:1.7.0*ff
> sml http://localhost/volkszaehler.org/middleware <uuid> <host>:<port> power
> The format is not exactly easy to read and it does not allow a intuitive configuration for multiple channels per sensor (e.g. for several phases of one meter).
> Steffen has therefore tried to find a more suitable format, you can find it here .
> What do you think? Any ideas?
> Regards, J.
>  http://wiki.volkszaehler.org/software/controller/vzlogger#proposal_for_new_configuration
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
More information about the volkszaehler-dev