boudewein wrote, On 16/04/07 04:26:
> 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.
I understand your doubts about the new configuration file format. It
wasn't a easy decision to make. In fact, you have explained all the
disadvantages for the new approach, and you were right in all of
them. Although there are many interesting features that this change
is providing:
- You won't need to learn to configure Cherokee. The administration
interface will do it for you. It will make people lives easier.
- There is no need to learn a configuration file format. No matter
how easy would be the format and how fast you could learn it, it
will be always easier and faster to skip it.
- It brings on-line help to users. Another feature to make your
administration experience smoother.
- Besides the internal configuration format, the interface will
remain being the same. If we have to change some configuration
key, you won't even notice it. Otherwise you would need to know
which key has change in order to fix it up.
So, IMHO there are many good points that support the current
approach. I do believe that all these changes in Cherokee 0.6 will
make the difference for many people. The beta version that we
released a few days ago didn't include the administration interface,
but we are currently working for getting it done for 0.6.0.
--
Greetings, alo.
_______________________________________________
Cherokee mailing list
[email protected]
http://cherokee-project.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cherokee
