... guess its because is it very flexible! :) my WASV.ASN isn't that big ... most of the stuff is the assignment to DBs ---8<--------------- [SETTINGS] $putmess_logfile C:\\USYS9\\log\\wasv.log ;$ioprint=255 ;$PROC_TRACING=TRUE ;$PROC_TRACING_ADDITION="%%$componentname- %%$status-%%$procerror" ;$PROC_PROFILING=TRUE ;$trc_info=all ;$trc_levels=9a ;$trc_start=c:\\uniface%p.trc ;### GHAN: 32 = only generated SQL ### ;$ioprint=32 ---8<--------------- ... and well ... some test stuff for situations that get you stuck. APACHE 2.x is HELL ... but this wasv.asn looks quiet readable Other opinions?

I wouldn't use straight apache... that's y I gave the example of WAMP Server. u pretty much don't have to touch apache (or mysql). everything can be controlled by a nice simple menu in the system tray. I wasn't saying that it's flexibility is bad, just that for simple tasks it can be somewhat more complicated than implementing a setup gui to manage the deployment, etc.

surely true, but lets think about such a tool. What should it be capable of? As far as i know, its possible to include other files from here and there to one complex configuration. This could turn out to be a tricky piece of software to develop which does nothing special but to deliver a "basic" configuration and has to handle ALL KIND of configurations to anyone in front of it. hmmm ...

But that's just a simpe thing if any "application" provides a proper API. All you have to do ist to put all these "plug-ins" under a common roof. MashUps are quite common nowadays. Uli