Bug#167513: the lack of consultation or discussion regarding this change is not good
> This change needs far more discussion and visibility - as far as I'm aware,
> no-one has filed a bug on apache2 for this change and there has not been a
> chance to discuss this bug in a public forum, such as debian-apache or
> debian-devel.
There has been an extremely long time for discussion on this ever since I
first proposed it some years ago. I'll file the bug against apache2, then.
> The current suggestions seems particularily badly thought out, since it will
> break upgrades from current stable.
I don't believe it will. The report specifically states that existing
definitions of /cgi-bin/ are not to be changed during an upgrade so as
to keep compatibility with existing versions. By placing an additional
/cgi-lib/ link, new packages can make use of that and then people can
eventually change the /cgi-bin/ to be for their own use, as it should
have in the beginning.
If you have suggestions on how to better think it out, then please bring
them up. Simply saying "I don't like this" provides little progress.
> Also, reading the bug filed with policy, I've not seen any statistics or
> evidence that this bug is in anyway representative of our users desire.
> Speaking as a sysadmin, I remove site-wide cgi-bin directories as a matter
> of course as soon as apache{,2} is installed.
This change in no way precludes continuing to do just that.
> We agree that there is potentially a need to allow site-admins to have a
> site wide cgi directory. However, there is no need that we can see to break
> existing setups by forcibly changing the location and meaning of cgi-bin,
> when a new directory such as simply "cgi" or "cgi-local" would serve the
> purposes of the proposed change equally well.
There is no forced change. Users can make the change any any time they
wish. The intent is merely to move the directory used by system packages
away from that directory traditionally used for user scripts.
> Note also, policy documents best current practise, it is not a stick to beat
> us with.
It is relevant when ensuring that numerous packages all work together, which
is the point in this case.
> As such, until further discussion comes up with a well reasoned need to
> break existing users, this bug will remain wontfix and wishlist only.
Since it won't break any existing users, I believe your resistance to be
somewhat misplaced.
Brian
( bcwhite@pobox.com )
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"A dollar saved is two dollars earned." -- Dave Chilton (The Wealthy Barber)
Reply to: