Adam Clarke wrote:

>Jim Starkey wrote:
>
>
>
>>Any thoughts?
>>
>>
>
>This seems like a good plan, except that I _respectfully_ question the
>wisdom of creating a reference implementation of the front end targeted
>directly to the Windows API, particularly when the database itself is so
>promiscuously cross platform.
>
>
>

Strategically, the front end is of little significance, so I'd like to
push the implementation to the background until the more import issues
are settled. The definitive piece of the administration server, totally
divorced from the front end by everything but a socket and a well formed
XML expression.

I have opinions concerning GUIs, having used about everything from X10
to MFC, but they aren't particularly germaine other than to say, well,
let's not say it.

The Netfrastructure analog has a Windows' GUI because almost everyone
who administers things has a Windows machine on his or her desk and I
detest (no, Jim, don't say it). The backend on Linux read and writes
Apache configuration files, Apache password files, web directories, and
registers and creates databases. It eliminates the extreme pain of
administering a Linux/Apache web server (other than the more extreme
pain of maintain Apache modules, which is a different question).

The Firebird administration server would have different
responsibilities. Maintaining the configuration file(s) is way up on my
list, however, as is backup, restore, maintaining a catalog of backup
files, maybe administering cron scripts to schedule automatic backups,
invoking gfix if absolutely necessary. GSec is obsolete with
create/alter/upgrade/drop user, so we don't have to worry about that
porker. I have not doubt that the DBAs on the list will excert their
abundent creativity to extend this list.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]