[jeroenhd]

I like yaml. It's easy and readable. It needs a linter, of course, or you end up with unescaped strings and whatnot, but it does its job well. Plus, for the strangely passionate yaml-haters out there, the fact you can feed any modern yaml parser JSON and still make it work is a benefit for those that want to avoid yaml at all costs.

I like XML as well, especially if combined with a clear schema so it's easy to write correct markup.

I can't say I've ever used Groovy. It seems like Kotlin's Gradle DSL has completely replaced it in practice, so I can't really comment on it.

Every configuration format has its pros and cons. It all depends on what you're using it for. I'm not a fan of the endless unstructured yaml in Kubernetes (I'd much rather have something that can be schema checked easily for config that huge) but I wouldn't use Groovy for that either.

[e12e]

> I'm not a fan of the endless unstructured yaml in Kubernetes (I'd much rather have something that can be schema checked easily for config that huge) but I wouldn't use Groovy for that either.

Wait, there's yaml with schema support? Do you have an example on hand?

Ed: > I like yaml. It's easy and readable.

I humbly disagree that deeply nested yaml is easy to read (and write) Kubernetes is awful - but so can complex docker compose files be.

> the fact you can feed any modern yaml parser JSON and still make it work is a benefit for those that want to avoid yaml at all costs.

Not really - JSON is a little easier to edit, but doesn't support comments - they're both pretty bad.

Even something bespoke like open tofu/terraform is better to work with IMNHO.