Jul 5, 2009 at 9:47 PM

Whats the point of not having the configuration contained in the web.config? If its because you don't want the web.config to grow large and unmanageble, you can let the user decide whether they want to use external include or not. If it's because you want to be able to easily validate the scheme you should consider using the fullblown configuration api, which supports collections and items and where validation is provided for free by the framework.

Advantages of using web.config include

no need to maintain an xml-scheme file for validation
automatic handling of caching and changes to the config file
familarity to developers of using a "well known system"
the user can decide for them selves if they want to inlcude the config in web.config or an external file. 

only disadvantage i can see is that changes to the config will restart the whole app, and not just reload the combine config, but that is kinda the expected behaviou anyway when changing configuration in .Net applications.

Oct 29, 2009 at 5:12 PM

@burningice: I started by putting it the web.config, then I immediately recognized the cons, which you mentioned, the whole app is restarted.  I don't want to have any unnecessary application restart.  Additionally, the engine does recognize when the external file is changed - therefore, I decided to do away from the web.config.