Fair enough. We can still allow for XML based configuration files in addition to alternative methods. Perhaps we can push the use of such a mechanism to be based on an optional system parameter.
Alex On 7/9/07, Mark Swanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Alex Karasulu wrote: > Mark keep in mind that you can use command line tools instead of a GUI > to set the configuration of the server when the configuration is in the DIT. > > Furthermore you can just load an LDIF instead of using a server.xml to > setup the initial configuration of the server. So you get the best of both > worlds: a flat configuration file and remote configuration capabilities. > > However we want to make sure we make the configuration interfaces as > easy to use as they were with the server.xml but behind the scenes > different mechanisms will be utilized. All in all it should be much more > plyable. Ok. One more email from me and I will stop being a stick in the mud :-) From what I understand of the command line tools, I assume you are speaking of 'load LDIF into server'? Wrt LDIF - I am sure that the sample ldif file with embedded examples would be more confusing to me, and a GUI/LDAP editor is not going to make this any better. I agree with Norval: <quote> Frankly I think XML is a much richer medium to express complex configuration settings as beans, then an LDAP schema which is better suited to modelling much simpler abstractions. </quote> <b> +1 </b> The existing configuration process works. Let's leave it at that and if folks want to take the time to build a GUI/alternate config format then please consider creating it as an alternate config/maintenance option. (Even if it was the primary/default option). Cheers. -- http://www.ScheduleWorld.com/ Free Google Calendar synchronization with Outlook, Evolution, cell phones, BlackBerry, PalmOS, Exchange, Mozilla, Thunderbird, Pocket PC/Windows Mobile. Also sync tasks, notes and contacts! WebDAV, vfreebusy, RSS, LDAP, iCalendar, iTIP, iMIP support.
