Message-Id: <199706130155.UAA10228@sierra.zyzzyva.com>
To: new-httpd@apache.org
Subject: Re: GUI Development for Apache 
In-reply-to: jim's message of Thu, 12 Jun 1997 18:33:27 -0400.
         <199706122233.SAA24942@devsys.jaguNET.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 20:55:42 -0500
From: Randy Terbush <randy@zyzzyva.com>
Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org

> Randy Terbush wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > My thoughts are that it is probably the one most visible item that 
> > we get beat up on in reviews and I have seen one Java interface 
> > that looks quite nice in it's early stages.
> > 
> > Rasmus made some good points in followup to this regarding the 
> > interface that the server provides. I'm proposing this discussion 
> > group mainly so that we (The Apache Group) can have some guiding 
> > hand in what we provide and pull together the fragments of people 
> > that are working on something. I also feel like I could provide 
> > more to this part of the project than I can to threading.
> > 
> > I think that a Tk frontend would be a good solution. Coupled with 
> > SNMP this could be a fairly portable interface to NT. (Haven't seen 
> > Tk on NT, but I hear that it works).
> > 
> 
> I think that new-httpd will be able to provide some excellent
> guidance in the fit and form of the GUI. I think it's great.
> But is anyone else semi-confused that for our Configuration scripts
> and such, we try to keep things as basic as possible, meaning
> assuming a v7 bourne and basic UNIX tools (and this is for
> _building_ the binaries) yet we're looking at/discussing/wondering
> about Tk and Java front-ends for _running_ it?

:-)  Don't interpret this that _I_ want a GUI to run this thing. I 
want a coherent set of hooks into the server for running it. If we 
have to use telnet to tweak them, that is fine. :-)