Re: I forgot
> I do not agree. Redhat seems to be more friendly for inexperienced user
> than debian, but in fact RH does many things in "standard" way. You dont
> know exactly how system is configured, and thats (IMHO) why this is not
> good system for ISP. Debian is more difficult to configure, but after
> doing this you know exactly how it works and what services are installed
This comment appears very often in Slashdot. Only if s/Debian/Slackware/
I think Debian always intended to serve experienced users while still being
easy to use and configure. There is no reason why you can't have both, given
that a good design is adopted.
I consider myself an experienced user and that is why I think templates make
sense. I like compilers and command line processors because you "see" what's
going on. But I still use makefiles and compile the kernel with
"make menuconfig". That is one example of a system which makes things easier
without hiding everything. However, in the case of the Linux kernel, the
files to be generated are just a bunch of makefiles, so no middleware is
necessary between the UI and the generated files.
In our case, configuration files are so heterogeneus that the menuconfig system
is not enough. As I said, it is a good system to populate the database
initially, because the database is just a bunch of homogeneous files (each
containing a table.) The function of the templates is giving the heterogeneous
shapes needed to the homogeneous data provided.
> (gotta go - have my birthsday party ;) )
Happy Birthday!
Fernando
Reply to: