Re: Let's have a Standard for Module Configuration

[Carl Johan Berglund]

That could be very nice. I would really prefer changing parameters 
through the API, by calling class functions or something, but I don't 
see why everyone should agree with me. Keeping source-editable 
parameters in a standard place would then be a win, especially 
considering your thoughts about the module install system.

What about Foo::Configuration?

/Cajo.

At 13.35 -0400 2000-08-25, David Corbin wrote:
There are several modules I've run across that require you to edit them
after you've installed them.  I consider this to be a very bad thing.
What I'm thinking is needed, is a standard way to have a file in the
module package that contains the editable parameters.  The name of this
file should be consistent relative to the module.  The module install
system should NEVER overwrite it, but should identify when some
configurable item is needed by a new revision that isn't in the old one
and warn the user.
---
Carl Johan Berglund, [EMAIL PROTECTED], 0708-136 236
Adverb Information, http://www.adverb.se, 08-555 788 30

Let's have a Standard for Module Configuration

[David Corbin]

I'm not sure which is the best mailing list to send this to, so forgive
me if I'm off.
I'll be glad to RFC this if there is interest.

There are several modules I've run across that require you to edit them
after you've installed them.  I consider this to be a very bad thing. 
What I'm thinking is needed, is a standard way to have a file in the
module package that contains the editable parameters.  The name of this
file should be consistent relative to the module.  The module install
system should NEVER overwrite it, but should identify when some
configurable item is needed by a new revision that isn't in the old one
and warn the user. 

I assume that this is really just another very small .pm file.

Thoughts?
-- 
David Corbin
Mach Turtle Technologies, Inc.
http://www.machturtle.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]