On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 09:42:53 +0200, Matej Cepl wrote:
Jane Dogalt <jdogalt(a)yahoo.com> writes:
> I for one really like the idea, with one extra caveat- Make sure there
> is also a good batch/commandline (read: scriptable) backend in addition
> to one or more GUI backends, and possibly a curses-ish text based one
> as well. (but my focus is on being able to easily control any
> functionality from a bash script).
This is the point which should be stressed a lot -- I mean, still the
main customers of RH are on server side and inability to use some tools
without installing gnome (ehm, ehm, gnome-power-manager) seriously
hurts. I know this is fedora list, but still there are some people who
use Fedora-based distros on servers, right?
Yes, lot of people seems to be using Fedora for servers. I agree the
problem of config tools has to be re-approached. Distinction between
backend and front-ends is desired.
I have my own lame view how this should be approached, I regret if some
might not agree because I am just a tech guy I hope someone else can
improve on it.
+ s-c-* tools have been done very well over the years
+ the development of s-c-* further should consider a backend and
* More or less we have discussed, but web frontend is what I cite as more
important. Once we have a backend in place, building a web based front
end is always quick and easy, that also helps speed up development and
testing. I believe there are various other advantages of such a
development trend for s-c-*
* I dully notice it might not be appropriate for every s-c-* tool to have
a web front-end, maybe someone else can help share their vision on this
* This will also require a daemon to host s-c-* tools on a Fedora host,
maybe something can be figured out ?
This all might sound like webmin kind of approach but I consider s-c-*
tools have worked very well and neat than webmin, besides that, fresh
ideas can do better. I had this in mind for a long while and I just felt
sharing it across on this thread.