Randy Terbush wrote: > > Delivery delay has been awful today.... > > > Over a year ago I was tasked with designing a limited GUI for Apache > > as part of Digital's Internet AlphaServer project. We used a separate > > management port for administration tasks. This made for a simpler > > security implimentation and an overall, more stable enviroment. > > Was the config server a separate process?
The config, or admin, server ran as a separate process on port 8089. It supported server startup, restart and shutdown. It supported review of error and access logs and rolling of the log files. It generated usage statistics and reports (using Analog). A never-released section of the GUI supported user and group access controls. All CGI scripts were written in TCL. > > I also strongly agree with Matthew that we should retain the current, > > human readable configuration files. In an environment where changes > > happen frequently and in wholesale lots (like a large ISP), the GUI > > can get in the way of efficient server maintenance. In these environ- > > ments, an editor or a specialized tool is a much faster way to main- > > tain users on the system. As an alternative to retaining the current > > configuration file structure, provide an API to support configuration > > changes. > > I don't think there is any danger of the flat file going away. > However, the syntax of the files will likely change in 2.0. I don't mind if the syntax changes, so log as I can still include copius comments in the config files 8^). I'm always forgetting why I did what unless it's well commented. > > If there is a real nead for an alternative storage format for config- > > uration information, I would recommend LDAP. This, at the least, should > > be supported for user authentication (yes, I know that there is a > > module for it). > > > > Randy, thanks for starting up this list. This is an area (one of the > > very few) where Apache has been lacking. > > Credit should go to the Apache group as a whole. We are interested > in making this a reality and think that communication with those > who have decided to tackle this project A Good Thing. > > There are many Apache group members present on this list. Sorry. I didn't mean to slight the rest of the group. I gratitude goes to everyone who helped make this great tool happen. Have a GREAT day! Pete
