Re: Proposal to improve package configuration upgrades
Stefano Zacchiroli <zack@debian.org> writes:
> I can agree, at least in theory. But as we all known, due to how
> source code tends to work, in 90% of the cases automatic merges do the
> right thing. Well, of course I cannot prove that number, but my
> personal feelings is that with a "high confidence" automatic merges do
> the right thing.
I think your numbers are right. The main problem I see is that the
automatic merge will not be able to inform the user whether the merge
is correct or not. In case of merge failure, the application will exit
on error and leave the average user in the dark. Even 10% of this kinf
of failure will be badly perceived.
> You know, in the general case it is an undecidable problem, so I
> seriously doubt Config::Model can be the silver bullet.
It's not as I already know that Config::Model cannot address *all*
config files.
> Possibly you can get a good coverage of most of the files we have
> under /etc which have a trivial structure (hence the questions
> raised by other people: how many of those files in a typical
> installation you can cover?).
Potentially, I'd say 90% of the files (very ballpark figure). But the
configuration files need to be created. Config::Model is designed to
reduce the work (and maintenance) work as the model are specifed in a
data structure. This data structure can be created and maintained with
a GUI (Config::Model::Itself).
> But then we are back at the issue of a 80-20 problem, and I see the
> VCS solution as more flexible and more readily available.
Agreed. But VCS solution is a 80% success/20% silent
failure. Config::Model is a 80% success/20% abort. The latter should
be easier to deal with for average user.
> But again, it looks to me that the two approaches can coexist.
Absolutely: Something like try Config::Model, if it fails (missing or
incomplete model) may be VCS merge with mandatory user interaction or
usual ucf question.
> ... now it is only the two of us which needs to stop talking and
> start proposing patches as needed :-)
:-)
For this I need a candidate package with a package maintainer willing
to experiment the patch I might send...
All the best
--
Dominique Dumont
"Delivering successful solutions requires giving people what they
need, not what they want." Kurt Bittner
irc:
domidumont at irc.freenode.net
ddumont at irc.debian.org
Reply to: