If i was to choose a new configuration file syntax for Cherokee i would choose one many people were already comfortable with. A unix-style or an ini-file syntax like Kuma mentioned in a previous post, or better yet the Apache file configuration syntax.
Many current Cherokee or Lighty users, if not all, started of as Apache users looking for a lighter webserver. To offer new users the best experience is to make their transition from Apache to Cherokee as smooth as possible. One of the reasons i prefer Cherokee over Lighty is because Cherokee uses the same scheme as Apache for enabling and disabling sites and modules. I think if Cherokee was to offer the same configration syntax as Apache 2.0 a lot of Apache users would turn to the Dark Side.. i mean turn to the Cherokee webserver. And it has the advantage of going back to Apache just as easily, no vendor lock-in :) And on a sidenote, configuration files on a server should always be editable and therefore readable by humans with a plain texteditor, be it vi, emacs or notepad. Configuration scripts or apps can fail while humans are more error tollerant. grtz. ------- Read this topic online here: http://www.cherokee-project.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=264#264 -------
_______________________________________________ Cherokee mailing list [email protected] http://cherokee-project.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cherokee
