Fair enough. We can still allow for XML based configuration files in addition
to alternative methods. Perhaps we can push the use of such a mechanism
to be based on an optional system parameter.
Alex Karasulu wrote:
> Mark keep in mind that you can use command line tools instead of a GUI
> to set the configuration of the server when the configuration is in the DIT.
> Furthermore you can just load an LDIF instead of using a server.xml to
> setup the initial configuration of the server. So you get the best of both
> worlds: a flat configuration file and remote configuration capabilities.
> However we want to make sure we make the configuration interfaces as
> easy to use as they were with the server.xml but behind the scenes
> different mechanisms will be utilized. All in all it should be much more
Ok. One more email from me and I will stop being a stick in the mud :-)
From what I understand of the command line tools, I assume you are
speaking of 'load LDIF into server'?
Wrt LDIF - I am sure that the sample ldif file with embedded examples
would be more confusing to me, and a GUI/LDAP editor is not going to
make this any better. I agree with Norval:
Frankly I think XML is a much richer medium to express complex
configuration settings as beans, then an LDAP schema which is better
suited to modelling much simpler abstractions.
<b> +1 </b>
The existing configuration process works. Let's leave it at that and if
folks want to take the time to build a GUI/alternate config format then
please consider creating it as an alternate config/maintenance option.
(Even if it was the primary/default option).
Free Google Calendar synchronization with Outlook, Evolution,
cell phones, BlackBerry, PalmOS, Exchange, Mozilla, Thunderbird,
Pocket PC/Windows Mobile. Also sync tasks, notes and contacts!
WebDAV, vfreebusy, RSS, LDAP, iCalendar, iTIP, iMIP support.