Facebook
Twitter
Paolo Furini
New Pleskian
Hi
my question is regarding developing and then submitting an extension to the official catalog.
I cannot share the details now, but my extension would need a "global" apache VirtualHost (or a server block in nginx), much like the one used to support the webmail subdomain for every domain on a server. So for example my extension code should be accessible under somethirdlevel.*.tld where * is every domain on which the extension is activated (again, much like the webmail support).
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that the only way to achieve that is to change the default Configuration Templates, as explained here in the docs: Changing Virtual Hosts Settings Using Configuration Templates
While doing the redirect at the domain level is easy, it's just a matter of using the pm_Hook_WebServer hook.
My question is:
Is it ok for an extension to create custom configuration templates, or to merge with existing ones, for such a purpose? And obviously they will be deleted on extension removal (if not further customized).
Such an extension can be accepted on the official catalog?
If that's not advisable, what's a more acceptable solution to this need? For example I'm thinking on installing a separate FCGI daemon/service and forward the incoming requests to it, but, again, I don't know if this goes against some "best practice" for extensions (like "no custom daemons/services please") .
Thanks in advance for your support.
P.F.
my question is regarding developing and then submitting an extension to the official catalog.
I cannot share the details now, but my extension would need a "global" apache VirtualHost (or a server block in nginx), much like the one used to support the webmail subdomain for every domain on a server. So for example my extension code should be accessible under somethirdlevel.*.tld where * is every domain on which the extension is activated (again, much like the webmail support).
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that the only way to achieve that is to change the default Configuration Templates, as explained here in the docs: Changing Virtual Hosts Settings Using Configuration Templates
While doing the redirect at the domain level is easy, it's just a matter of using the pm_Hook_WebServer hook.
My question is:
Is it ok for an extension to create custom configuration templates, or to merge with existing ones, for such a purpose? And obviously they will be deleted on extension removal (if not further customized).
Such an extension can be accepted on the official catalog?
If that's not advisable, what's a more acceptable solution to this need? For example I'm thinking on installing a separate FCGI daemon/service and forward the incoming requests to it, but, again, I don't know if this goes against some "best practice" for extensions (like "no custom daemons/services please") .
Thanks in advance for your support.
P.F.
