Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hyperreal.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id WAA12525; Wed, 16 Jul 1997 22:00:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from twinlark.arctic.org (twinlark.arctic.org [204.62.130.91]) by hyperreal.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id WAA12325 for ; Wed, 16 Jul 1997 22:00:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 21302 invoked by uid 500); 17 Jul 1997 05:00:11 -0000 Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 22:00:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Dean Gaudet To: new-httpd@apache.org Subject: Re: config files stuff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org Can you give an example where this is useful? I'm not a fan of having three config files... let alone an arbitrary number :) 'sides if you're going to this effort you might as well make the AccessConfig and ResourceConfig directives use your ConfigFile code and ditch the extra structure members. Dean On Tue, 15 Jul 1997, Stanley Gambarin wrote: > Greetings, fellow Apacheers :) I wanted to complain about the > organization of the configuration files. Recent growth of the directives > had resulted in the increased size of the config files and the complexity > in their maintenance. However, the code for processing of all 3 > configuration files is the same, which allows you to put directives > intended for one config file into another. The patch below takes the idea > one step further by allowing you to specify your own config files. > Hopefully, this would make it easy for module developers to specify their > own configuration (modules not distributed with Apache), as well as > virtual host management. Stuff below works for me (although minimally > tested) and can probably be applied to core to get away with using > resource and access.conf completely.