[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: SEUL: seul-db and high-level vs. low-level

> From: Brian Candler <B.Candler@pobox.com>
> The net effect is that I believe the LL data store approach will take a LOT
> more effort to implement. With a HL data store, each package maintainer
> could maintain their own template/generator, or one person could maintain a
> whole bunch of templates. With the LL data store, the admin module for a
> single package itself becomes a major software undertaking, needing an
> amount of work which starts to become comparable to the work invested in the
> package which you are trying to provide an admintool for!

Well, I do agree that there would be a good deal more work involved in case 2,
but I do think it would pay off.  I don't think it will be as much work as you
forsee if we do more of a Bi-level UI:

	Usually the data is presented as HL data, but the user is given the
	option to customize it on a low level scale.  if LL data isn't
	recognized, it can be treated as a customized option.

I really want to leave the ability to tweak low-level stuff in the UI burried
in the "customize" section anyway.  Also I REALLY think we should try to 
keep our data in the actual config files (although the idea of using a single
config file as a method of transporting configs between different machines
interested me (but only as a data interchange format).  this will promote
users learning how unix works... (something like windows and it's *.INI files)


Simple End User Linux Mailing list
To be removed from this mailing list send a message to majordomo@txcc.net
with the line
unsubscribe seul-project
in the body of the letter.