Isn't the centralized configuration management simplified in the Xindice world by using the system.xml file? I mean, isn't that the place where new or extended configuration information should go?
I am thinking about adding some more config information there regarding the xmlrpc server (which I'll post when I have something ready). Should I pursue a configuration style other than adding more lines into the system.xml file? dave -----Original Message----- From: Vladimir R. Bossicard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 27, 2002 4:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Xindice configuration > Does this mean that a configuration file must be explicitly passed on > the CLI or is there a default value? No, but it can. Currently the embed driver _requires_ (AFAIK) a configuration file to be explicitely passed. > if we have to configure the driver we lose in usability well I'm not convinced about that. If you look at the users-ml, the users have a hard time configuring xindice for their needs. How many users complained to not know where their database was created? > I see the point, but I'm not sure that I like this total anarchy. I > might agree that each driver developer might specify her own > configuration file format, but in the end there must be some sort of > centralized configuration management system. "total anarchy" is not how I would caracterize the proposed solution. Xindice has currently 2 drivers: one requires a configuration file on the CLI and the other one not. On the opposite, the xmlrpc driver needs a configuration on the server side. I think a good test would would be to develop the webdav driver and see what kind of configuration we need. I'm not opposed of going with default values, but I want to at least give the user some configuration options (which is not case at the moment). -Vladimir -- Vladimir R. Bossicard Apache Xindice - http://xml.apache.org/xindice
