Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

Is rq still a *query* tool? #207

Closed
Gerrit-K opened this issue Dec 24, 2019 · 4 comments
Closed

Is rq still a *query* tool? #207

Gerrit-K opened this issue Dec 24, 2019 · 4 comments

Comments

@Gerrit-K
Copy link

I've come across rq while looking for an alternative to jq two days ago and I still didn't find any documentation on the query syntax. The "Tutorial" section just shows how to pretty-print JSON. It appears that there once were several other sections in the docs about the "query" aspect, but they are gone since 1.0. Is it still possible to actually query any data read by rq?

PS: others seem to struggle with the current documentation as well, e.g. #200

@dflemstr
Copy link
Owner

I've been trying to ramp up rq development after a long break due to it being super difficult to maintain the Javascript-based query engine. I have plans to re-add query functionality to the tool, but I'm not 100% sure of what that should look like. Do you have any input? Maybe we could create a discussion "issue" where we try to design the new query language.

@Gerrit-K
Copy link
Author

Gerrit-K commented Jan 4, 2020

Sorry for the delay. I can imagine that maintaining open source projects sometimes takes a lot of time and commitment. And that's a fair point. To me (regarding this issue) it would just suffice to add a noticeable disclaimer at the README so that every new visitor is aware of the current state (and maybe where to find old releases and their documentation).

Regarding the ramp-up: I really like the idea of a cross-format querying tool, but I can also imagine that it will be difficult to find a syntax that fits multiple formats while still being flexible and reasonably easy to use. If you want to go towards that direction, then yes, I think a separate (pinned) issue for discussion would be a good idea. If you want to focus on the transformation functionality instead, I would suggest to choose another name (or migrate the code to a fresh new repository) to avoid confusion.

@dflemstr
Copy link
Owner

dflemstr commented Jan 4, 2020

Did as you suggested, I will close this issue and encourage others to follow up through #208 instead.

@dflemstr dflemstr closed this as completed Jan 4, 2020
@pickfire
Copy link

rq seemed like a conversion tool after reading the docs, like what I did for https://github.com/pickfire/babelfish

# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants