Re: [system-tools]xml configuration file

[Carlos Garnacho <garnacho tuxerver net>]

Hi Tiago,

As I told you in IRC, while it might be a sensible solution and that all
distros should unify in a single configuration schema, I don't think at
all that we should give the first step here, my main reasons are:

- distro specific tools & apps will rely in the distros' config files,
causing data duplication, misinformation, errors, user headaches, etc...

- we still should parse config files (at least for creating the initial
home-made config file), and at some point, we still should rewrite the
config files, for data consistency

- this is only valid in the network config issue, IMHO the GST look for
a broader point of view for config stuff

- This would be more a maintenance pain than a bless for the gst
developer(s?)

Of course, these problems should vanish if the distros agree on a common
config file, but I expect more to see cows in the moon than distros
agreeing on something like this :)

	Regards

El mié, 28-04-2004 a las 01:55, +0000, Tiago Cogumbreiro escribió:
> I would like to propose to the list an effort to try to create a XML
> specification file that would provide the network configuration details.
> 
> Why?
> Unix has a know problem, a miss of standard. Because of the openness of
> Open Source each of us tries to create the best solution for a given
> problem, while this is great for some things it is not that good for
> other, because it may lead to fragmentation and disorder, therefore
> losing effectiveness.
> 
> GST, and you should know this more than i do, suffers alot from the
> "each distribution has it's own spec" effect, in what concerns to
> network configuration (from now on netconf) each distribution has it's
> location and syntax on debian it's a file in /etc/network/interfaces in
> redhat it's located under /etc/sysconfig/networkm under slackware in
> rc.network, it is an extraneous operation to add and keep up to date
> support on each of this platforms.
> 
> The solution to this problem, IMHO, is not that difficult. Why not
> provide a new spec for this type of file, and not a spec based in bash
> or any other syntax, we need something technically advanced such as XML,
> it gives us all the benefits that all of you must already be aware of.
> Some might say that it won't solve all problems, and that's true, one
> thing that has to be created is a service that should be called uppon
> system boot that would load the configuration file, but i don't think
> that this is harder then supporting all configuration files available on
> every distribution (and operating system) that GNOME might used on.
> 
> We want an universal configuration tool, why not depend on a spec that
> is more accessible and open?
> 
> With one configuration file it is up to the back-end to take care of how
> it is implemented, whether it's on Linux or on FreeBSD. This way the
> work of back-ends is focused on configuration and not parsing data.
> 
> This case study was made on netconf, i leave it to you to think about
> the following: Is it possible to have other tasks GST currently does
> with configuration files?
> My guesses are that in some cases, as services, it isn't possible, the
> only viable solution is the LSB kind of approach.
> 
> Tiago Cogumbreiro
> 
> _______________________________________________
> system-tools-list mailing list
> system-tools-list gnome org
> http://lists.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/system-tools-list
>