> On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, Matthew J. Probst wrote: > > >On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, Randy Terbush wrote: > > > >> On that note, can I turn the conversation back to some type of API > >> to the config information? By adopting an API, a change in config > >> file format can be transparent to GUI developers. > > > >First, with an API inside apache we would have to rely upon the stability > >of the main httpd server itself.. I dont think we can rely on this.. > > I think you're misunderstanding what Randy's getting at. (assuming > that I'm not the one misunderstanding that is .. ) We're not > talking about an API inside Apache, but rather a seperate, built > from the ground up, configuration server that responds to a > standard telnet. From a GUI point-of-view, if you have a nice > easy API like the one he demonstrated it makes it very easy to > slap together a GUI wrapper to talk to the configuration server > through that API. Also, if you have an easy to use API like that, > you could write small expect-ish scripts to do bulk changes. > > -Mark
Correct Mark. Whether it is a standalone server or an Apache module is up for debate. I personally would like to keep it in the server binary since it seems less problematic. It would be possible for the server to spawn a separate config daemon at startup. This might be an interesting application for a logging daemon as well.
