[bug-myserver] Google Summer of Code '09 - GUI

[ivailo ilionov]

> Yes, it must work with configuration written in XML, but better add an
> abstraction level here, keeping all the XML related code in a
> class/package.  This will add the possibility later to use something
> different than XML.
> The control protocol offers few commands, the only one you need to
> really investigate is file transfer.  If a remote server want to be
> managed, then {myserver, virtualhosts, MIMEtypes}.xml are transferred
> locally, modified by the user and send back to the remote server.
> Shortly, any configuration session is based on these three files, it
> should be possible to choose exactly their path.


 Why should the application write directly to a config file ? Anyway
it'll only be an
option if the app and the server are on the same machine. ( which is
often true for
home based servers )

If we take out the "local management" and do everything through the
server ( i still haven't check how the control_protocol.[cpp|h] is
used and if it is used where the
server acts as ftp only ). Of course, we follow the process as written above:

- the  server reads the config files
- converts them to xml if neccessary
- send them to the client
- the client sends them back in xml after editing is finished
- the server reads them and convert to appropriate config format if neccesssry

In this case, the "abstract layer" is the server which convert to/from
xml format
from/to some format.

Now when that's out of our head, what if the user have two servers which he
wants to have identical configuration ? :) Or what if there are more ?
Unless for
testing I don't imagine other practical scenario ( maybe something
private available
through intranet ? ), but we can put it in  the optional features, no ?:)

<off-topic>
s/(out of our) head/$1 way/; #For the previous paragraph
</off-topic>