> Randy Terbush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >Storage of the config info could move to: > >- Berkeley DB 2.0 > >- SQL > >- others? > > This is an interesting thought. But if we go and change the config > storage information mechanism for apache, it implies that there will need > to be changes to the code base to do so. This is something we should > think long and hard about. Since it would imply that the only way to > update the config information is thru the gui. I believe that this > would be a mistake. > > I think that we would be better served to treat the gui config > manipulation as an adjunct to the base apache code. This gives us the > most freedom in how we do things. But still maintains compatibility with > the code base. > Just my opinion, > Brad Eacker ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Not necessarily. It would be easy to create a Perl apache-vi wrapper for example that would retreive the information into an edit session and then store it back to a DB format on save. The configuration files have the potential of becoming much more complicated to get right. A configuration interface, be it GUI or Curses, or whatever could make it much easier to stay out of trouble, even for experienced sysadmins.
