On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 08:46:02PM +0200, Andreas B. Mundt wrote:
On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 02:05:19PM +0200, Philipp Huebner wrote:
I think it would be the best thing to decide on either tool soon, and than work on getting that fully implemented.Neither one seems to be perfect (yet?), but with limited manpower we should focus on one tool, not several.That's absolutely right. We currently have 4 attempts running to solve the issue: CipUX, GOsa, and now Jonas' tool. (The fourth one is the sum of all ideas floating around but never get realized plus the time spent trying to reanimate LWAT). For sure every attempt has its pros and cons, some have been discussed here and others not.
Depending on how you count all of CipUX, CAT-Web, CATWeasel and my planned future work are either part of the same single tool, or there are way more than the 4 tools you list above:
CipUX is a *framework*, with multiple front-ends: * command-line interfaces (several, for different abstraction layers) * XML-RPC interface * Web interfaces (several, on top of the XML-RPC) * GTK/Qt/whatever GUI tool (none yet, just ideas by me)What Skolelinux should decide on, in my opinion, is not that much the tool but the data model.
Ideally, Skolelinux should design its data model (i.e. the LDAP DIT) based on functional needs, not based on the admin tool used.
Both GOsa and CipUX should be flexible enough to adapt to a data model chosen by Skolelinux - especially when built using common standard elements, as Andreas and Petter is working hard on doing.
In reality it is faster to design the data model based on the defaults of the data admin tool, but don't let that deceive you: it is still the data model you are really deciding on, if aiming for a single single tool.
Regards, - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature