Quoted Originally posted by mart_k I think webmin is better than a configuration program in KDE. If you have a configuration module, users might think that X is needed to run an apache server, or users might install X because of the configuration module. AFAIK, for servers with only apache, it is better to not install an X server (X contains many lines of code => X contains (many) bugs => more chance to have a critical bug). Webmin does work on a server with X (in - for example - Konqueror) and...
Quoted Originally posted by anda_skoa Quoted Originally posted by tbscope As for the integration of KDE and Apache. Why would this be a problem on Linux and not on Windows? I agree. Windows definitely doesn't have a GUI for every possible service it can run. _ I think MS is showing that Apache cares flop-all for GUI users, and expected the attendee to contrast this in their mind with IIS. Very many developers and sysadmins would not want to be forced into using the CLI, esp. when they are often...
eWeek has an article about a Microsoft sponsored hands-on lab where KDE and Apache are featured: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1835516,00.asp I think its kind of sad if KDE was used to argue that Linux has a "steep learning curve". Would this kind of be avoided if KDE had a configuration Kpart for Apache in the control center? What if Apache supplied such a thing, or met KDE half-way by providing an API?
