On Wednesday 03 April 2002 01:02, Joe Cooper wrote:
> Simple includes requires the user to know what they need to change.
> Of course comments can help here--but we already have lots
> comments in the squid.conf...probably too many for new users.
Agreed.
Sidenote:
I have several times before proposed to split squid.conf in two
files.. a annotated template configuration, and separate
documentation. I will keep proposing this every now and then until we
are there.
Having the documentation within squid.conf is bad because
a) Does not get updated when Squid is (only squid.conf.default is
updated)
b) With all that documentation interleaved with the configuration
it is very hard to see what one has to edit to get going, or to at
all make sense of the overall configuration used.
> Being the selfish sort that I am, though, I'm thinking of my use
> for wanting includes which is to allow a single squid.conf (with a
> few differences) to be used in a cluster environment easily.
> Everything else is just gravy. Either option will work for my
> primary purposes...simple includes, or preprocessor includes.
> Either is an improvement over today.
I withstand my view that this improvement is only of very minor
nature.
Already today we do have the option to preprocess configuration files
before handing them over to Squid. And most people (including you I
presume) are using scripts to start/stop/reconfigure Squid where
adding this preprocessing is trivial without at all having to add
anything to Squid.
Regards
Henrik
Received on Tue Apr 02 2002 - 16:21:57 MST
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:14:56 MST