On Sat, 2004-01-17 at 18:30, Jamie Heilman wrote:
> Its desirable in some circumstances, but not all. Part of the problem
> is people tend to blindly follow the traditional approach to daemon
> design without bothering to actually do any critical thinking.
I expect you don't intend to sound rude, but this gives the impression
you think I've failed to do some necessary critical thinking. Even if I
you think that, it's hardly diplomatic to point it out.
> There are several very reasonable arguments for deviation from the
> historical approach.
What are they?
> historical approach. Perhaps the most relevant argument is the same
> old one about the Unix design philosophy; many small programs working
> together is more a flexible and ultimately useful approach than a monolithic
> one-program-does-it-all design.
I don't follow how this advice relates to the current discussion. We're
talking about whether zdrun.py should have a --umask option. zdrun is a
small program. It just allows some other program to run as a daemon.
> Anyway, if you want to question authority, consider reading:
I don't see how this questions authority. It sounds entirely compatible
with the design of zdaemon. (The TCP/IP stuff doesn't apply to
zdaemon, and Zope works differently, but that's typical for app
Are you familiar with zdaemon?
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -