On 10-oct-08, at 14:50, Antonio Pérez wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Benjamin Podszun <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > wrote:
>>
>
> First of all, I'm using cherokee since last days of August, and I'm
> trying to learn about it and help with bug reports since then.
>
> I agree with you about cherokee-admin. One of my first private
> messages to Alvaro was about cherokee-admin. I said him that it was
> more a stone in my way that a help.

Guys, we are ALL for improving it until we get it to be the  
outstanding tool that it's meant to be. :-)  Please, do not hesitate  
to speak up and expose your ideas. They will certainly help us to  
speed up the development.

> Now, I think that cherokee-admin is a great idea, but must evolve.
> Anyway, I think that config file must be more user friendly too. Most
> users of cherokee are sysadmins, so they use "vi" without problems...
> :)

IMHO that's more a bug than a feature, you know.

As far as cherokee-admin allows to configure every little piece of the  
server, there should not be a single reason to go back to the 60s and  
start modifying a configuration text file.

Cherokee-admin aims to make people's life easier. Quick frankly, even  
if it isn't still perfect, I think it eases the web server  
administration process for most of the users.

--
Octality
http://www.octality.com/

_______________________________________________
Cherokee mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee

Reply via email to