On 28 Mar 2008, at 00:29, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > Oh! As a side note: 0.6 allows for the inclusion of configuration file > snippets. What would be more advisable in your point of view, keeping > the configuration as it currently is, spilled over several different > and manageable files, or merging it together into one Big file? I > bring the question mainly because I think it will make more sense that > way to cherokee-admin, but I might be mistaken.
Good quetion. That has been a hidden issue for quite some time now. Cherokee 0.5 supported splitted configuration files. It was a nice-to- have that allowed people to keep the configuration directory tidy, so it did make sense to support it. Now, with Cherokee 0.6, people are not even supposed to know where the configuration file is. That is the whole point on cherokee-admin, actually. Having that into account, it does not matter how the configuration directory is: is it clean? "Dunno, but I do not care! I have be shiny administration interface to deal with it :-)". The only remaining problem is that distribution may not be able to integrate other packages with Cherokee 0.6; at least not as easily as with Cherokee 0.5 (Previously, the only thing they had to do was to drop a little configuration file in the mods-enabled directory). My idea is to implement some sort of mechanism to allow web software packages to add "wizards" to Cherokee admin; but quite frankly, it is not one of the top priority items in the TODO list. -- Greetings, alo. http://www.alobbs.com/ -- Greetings, alo. _______________________________________________ Cherokee mailing list [email protected] http://cherokee-project.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cherokee
