[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: new documents

Raphael Hertzog wrote:

> Le Mon, Mar 22, 1999 at 11:35:19AM -0600, Jens B. Jorgensen écrivait:
> > 1) Decentralize control. I dislike the idea of having a central control file.
> > This file would have to be owned and writable only by root. This makes adding
> > software difficult/impossible for users without root access.
> >
> > Instead, use a CONFIG_PATH variable which would have a list of URLs. Define
> > modules for each type (file:, http:, ldap:) and allow an interface (like PAM
> Why not override the location of the config file with a environment
> variable ? The libs could look for /etc/configuration, ~/.configuration
> and setting the environment variable would allow one to override the
> location of the file.

Ok, but remember that configuration databases may not exist. They may be an
LDAP/HTTP servers.

> > 2) Reduce cost of ownership. I can see the value to the debian distribution of
> > all the complicated machinery to make it easier for package maintenance, eg. a
> > link back to the package for each variable, the IsDefault flag, variable meta
> > data, etc. These things are excellent ideas and would prove invaluable to
> > debian developers. However, I would hope that this configuration system would
> > become widespread and adopted by all linux software and distributions.
> > To implement all the debian package related things a special debian hierarchy.
> > I don't believe the power of the system would be decreased by this approach
> > and this would keep the system easily accessible to all developers.
> They would be useful for everyone, not only for Debian. I don't see the
> need of taking it away...
> The metadata could be implemented in a neutral way so that nothing would be
> Debian specific.

Still, I regard this stuff as extra baggage, requiring more work on the part of the
developer to supply the information and more storage space.

> > Lastly, I wholeheartedly advocate the construction of a mailing list. I really
> > hope that we can develop this system with a lower-level which will not be
> > debian-specific and will make no assumptions about or uses of artifacts of a
> > debian system. That we we can get everyone on board. I offer a machine (a Red
> > Hat box, alas) with fast full-time connectivity and my own time to administer
> > a list if it isn't set up on lists.debian.org.
> We can coordinate this effort here, it's up for such things. The list is
> open to the world.

I don't think debian-admintool is an appropriate forum since this is a subset of
debian-admintool but is significant, ie. we should have non-debian folks involved in
my opinion and they probably won't be interested in other topics relating to
specifically to debian-admintool.

Jens B. Jorgensen

Reply to: