On Sun, Oct 01, 2006 at 06:59:35PM +0200, Markus Wigge wrote: > > The webif story: > > What to do with webif/webif2 for 1.0? Some days ago I talked to > > Markus and he said, he needs webif for some projects, so I decided > > to keep nvram based network configuration and webif in parallel to > > our new network configuration. > > > > Should we keep it this way, or will be webif2 for our new network > > configuration ready in a few weeks? > Ok, maybe this was a bit misunderstanding... It's ok for me to fully > drop nvram support now to get a clean base release 1.0. > > I tried to investigate the x-wrt work and the buildroot-ng stuff and > noticed that x-wrt goes heavily the OpenWRT way and hangs on with > Whiterussian for now. > > In webif2 I started to take what I found usuable from x-wrt and > cleaned it up for a first shot. Next I'm thinking about rewriting > the network config stuff to interact with the "interfaces" file. > > What still keeps missing is a kind of registry for the other stuff: > ntp-Server, syslog settings, timezone, dhcp settings ... > > I'd like to take a deeper look to the buildroot-ng style with an > /etc/config directory for that as it simplifies the webif > development A LOT!! > > So, please get rid of nvram and don't support both. Webif may even be > backported to 1_0 if it works. It's not that important.
Markus, I agree with you to support only one config method, not two (and supporting it then for many releases...). So, dropping the old webif stuff should be done _before_ 1.0. I think it better to deliver no web interface but a unusable one. For the config files I must agree to Markus to. Supported various config parsers in a webinterface is hard to implemented and to maintain. But this is too much work now, nothing for a 1.0 release. Dirk _______________________________________________ freewrt-developers mailing list [email protected] https://www.freewrt.org/lists/listinfo/freewrt-developers
