Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 13:25:00 +0100 (BST) From: Nik Clayton <nik@blueberry.co.uk> To: mark@grondar.za (Mark Murray) Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Apache conf -> etc Message-ID: <199608081225.NAA24232@guava.blueberry.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <199608071944.VAA03536@grumble.grondar.za> from "Mark Murray" at Aug 7, 96 09:44:15 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> The only place where folks are likely to get confused is those who
> are heavily used to the original philosophy of "everything under
> www". I believe that this is a weak argument, and the philoshophy/religion
> of "all configs in etc" is 1) easier to remember 2) easier/better
> control 3) more consistent.
Horses for courses. As a webmaster responsible for several sites, I find
it simpler to use something like
/path/site_name/conf
/html
/log
/cgi-bin
/src
and so on, keeping everything related to one site under one banner (as it
were).
Then again, experienced admins are probably going to download the source
and build it themselves anyway, so it fits into their own scheme of things.
Me, I have an almost pathological hatred of programs cluttering up /etc
(or subdirectories thereof) with their configuration programs. But if
it absolutely had to go in /etc (or similar), wouldn't /usr/local/etc
be a better choice?
N
--
--+=[ Blueberry Hill Blueberry Design ]=+--
--+=[ http://www.blueberry.co.uk/ 1/9 Chelsea Harbour Design Centre, ]=+--
--+=[ WebMaster@blueberry.co.uk London, England, SW10 0XE ]=+--
--+=[ Have a banana. . . ]=+--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199608081225.NAA24232>