Hacker News Reader

It is definitely not the fault of YAML. It has its own issues but that is another story.

The problem is when you use YAML (or an ad hoc interpreter embedded in YAML, or a templating system built on top of YAML) for things that should really be a programming language. Things like imports and functions and composition are useful. Templating is a more ergonomic form of string concatenation.

View on HN

Usually, when I have to deal with these crazy complicated YAML files at work, I'm not thinking, "I wish they had just turned all the configuration into a mess of shell scripts." I'm thinking, "We really need to clean this up. It's way more complicated than is necessary."

You have a point. A mess of shell scripts doesn't really sound like an improvement. If the config is too complex and the config consumer can be changed to simplify things then that should be the way to go.

However, if the config is a travisCI YAML file that is really just a glorified list of commands I don't think bash or a makefile is a bad solution. Take as much as possible out of the CI config and use a neutral standard format like a makefile to encapsulate much of your logic.

Then when TravisCI stops offering free usage for open source, its easy to move, because your format isn't specific to a vendor.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com