> On top of that, if you did want YAML for easier readability, what
> aspect of the output is more readable in YAML than it is in text
> format? The only answer I can think of is that you like having each
> data element on a separate line, so that the plan is much longer but
> somewhat narrower. But if that's what you want, the JSON output is
> almost as good - the only difference is a bit of extra punctuation.
"almost as good" ... I agree with Kevin that it's more readable.
The whole patch just adds 144 lines. It doesn't look to me like there's
significant maintenance burden involved, but of course I need to defer
to the more experienced. It's even possible that we could reduce the
size of the patch still further if we really looked at it as just a
differently punctuated JSON.
Having compared the JSON and YAML output formats, I think having YAML as
a 2nd human-readable format might be valuable, even though it adds
nothing to machine-processing.
Again, if there were a sensible way to do YAML as a contrib module, I'd
go for that, but there isn't.
--Josh Berkus
