On 3/31/06, John W. Linville <linville@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 01:30:12PM -0300, Avi Alkalay wrote: > > So you may think there is a reason, lost in time, but there is > > actually no reason why BIND named.conf file look that way, which is > > different from /etc/passwd, which is different from smb.conf, which is > > different from httpd.conf. > > ...except that configuring a name server is a differnt problem domain > than configuring user accounts, than configuring a file server, > than configuring a web server, etc. I thought we were talking about the syntax, and not semantics. > Migrating thousands of Unix-oriented applications to XML-based > (or similar) configurations schemes, only so that you then have to > develop new tools for each application to turn the XML config file into > something appropriate for the given application, just makes no sense. Yeah, this really makes no sense. Thank God we are clever enough to not walk in the path your imagination just described. But it would help if people understand what we are trying to do first, and after that make public criticisms that make more sense than your based-on-nothing statement. Thank you Avi -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
