Re: [dev-serveez] Avoiding code fork/duplication of serveez cfg code

[stefan]

Hello!

On 28 Nov 2002, Andreas Rottmann wrote:

> However, I yesterday hacked up Serveez to make the configuration
> mechansim more flexible. A short description follows, for more
> information, see the patch and especially the changes to the
> ChangeLogs.

I just applied the reviewed patch to CVS.  Please note the below comments.

> * svz_server_config_t is now named svz_config_accessor_t, however
>   svz_server_config_t is typedef'd to svz_config_accessor_t.

The 'svz_server_config_t' name is misleading.  That is why I dropped it
completely.

> * svz_servertype_t has now a member `config_prototype' of type
>   svz_config_prototype_t instead of `items', `prototype_start and
>   `prototype_end'.

This prototype has now also a name.

> * You can register "configurable types" with
>   svz_configurable_type_add(name, type) and instantiate them with
>   svz_configurable_type_instantiate(name, type).

These are called:
  * svz_config_type_add
  * svz_config_type_instantiate

> * There is a Guile binding for svz_configurable_type_instantiate:
>   "svz:configurable-type-instantiate".

That is named:
  * "instantiate-config-type!"

> I've attached the gzipped patch against CVS. The code is in no way
> fixed in any way, I'm open for comments, so flame on :-). Of course
> I'd like people to test this patch with their Serveez setups, it
> *should* not really break anything besides ABI compatibility (of
> course), if you don't explicitly mess with svz_servertype_t's config
> members.

I made some working tests and also fixed at least two bugs in it.  Also I
added proper documentation.

Yet need to write kind of test for triggering all of the error conditions.

Can you please adapt your 'service' code to the renamed functionality and
tell us whether it works or not?

Thanks in advance,
        address@hidden