Comment 9 for bug 1219223

I was hoping to move away from that template engine to something light and
as a result faster.

kind regards

On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Bohuslav "Slavek" Kabrda <
<email address hidden>> wrote:

> Hi, I'd also like to be of assistance here. Scott, reading this bug and
> bug 1247132, I'm not sure where I could help right now - are you suggesting
> that we need to support cheetah-compatbile syntax in python3 port? Or are
> you suggesting that we support different template syntax as a default for
> the python3 port?
> The first option seems unlikely to happen, since cheetah upstream is dead
> and I don't know any templating engine that would be fully compatible with
> cheetah. The second option would be, in my eyes, very confusing, since I'd
> expect the same beheviour regardless of Python version I run cloud-init
> with.
> What I'm trying to say is, we should decide to switch to another
> templating engine (e.g. mako) and stick with it.
> Or we could do a compromise and support both mako and cheetah for Python 2
> and only mako for Python 3 (and differentiate between them e.g. based on
> file extension or sth. like that).
> Would that be acceptable?
> Thanks!
> --
> You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to the bug
> report.
> Title:
> Is it possible that we switch from cheetah to a lighter weight
> template engine?.
> Status in Init scripts for use on cloud images:
> Triaged
> Bug description:
> Switch is suggested as cheetah pulls in too many dependencies.
> I would like to suggest something smaller to ensure our package is
> lighter.
> Related bugs:
> bug 1247132: Python 3 support and dropping cheetah
> To manage notifications about this bug go to:

Skype: Frankie.Onuonga
twitter: Frankieonuonga
irc #freenode: Frankieonuonga