"Scott C. Best" wrote:
>
> Yikes, from schema to UI in 5 emails. :)
> Getting back (briefly) to the subject which spawned this thread,
> let me offer a collection of opinions:
>
> 1. To make UI design easier for everyone, it'd be *nice* if the user's
> intentions for the firewall were stored on the firewall in XML format.
> A firewall.conf, as it were.
I don't like this whole thread, but I'm a bit crotchety this morning.
I disagree with #1. I don't want to have anything to do with XML, and if that's
what's going to happen here, then it's not for me. If someone wants to build
up some cgi-scripts to do https configuration with the files that exist, I like
that idea, as it's possible with weblet or whatever and almost everyone has a browser.
I don't like the idea of a standard interface for all the flavors of Lrp.
I like it when there's differences and when people follow their own quest
for glory. I like innovation and non-standard apps. I can't stand the
way most windows programs look the same. I enjoy it when people develop
their own methods for solving an issue, especially when their solution is
modular. I don't like the possiblilty of some XML design parameters
reigning in people's work away from what they consider to be the best
solution to a specific issue. I would like to see other flavors of Lrp.
I like the freedom to work with the well known programs that compose Lrp.
It would bother me to be a slave to firewall.conf. I am against umbrella
standards, in general, because I'm unconventional.
Just my little old opinion, not well reasoned, and probably flawed,
Matt
_______________________________________________
Leaf-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
