Re: Bug#167513: the lack of consultation or discussion regardingthis change is not good

[Tollef Fog Heen <tfheen@raw.no>]

* Brian White 

| There's nothing wrong.  It's just ironic.  Thom complained about use
| not consulting you when talking policy and then he (and you) discuss it
| all between yourselves without consulting me.

You weren't there.  If you want to help out with apache development,
#debian-apache @ OFTC is where we discuss matters.

| I've very consious of the potential problems which is why I tried to come
| up with a series of steps such that there would be little if any negative
| impact on users who just expect their system to "work".

Upgrades won't work, or apache will need to have versioned conflicts
with 115 packages, since those older packages will have cgi-bin as
their prefix, while they should now have cgi-lib.  A conflicts line
like that is clearly unacceptable.

(To see how this breaks:  you install new apache, which means you
don't get cgi-bin pointing to /usr/lib/cgi-bin, you install some old
package, like mailman, which expects /cgi-bin to point to
/usr/lib/cgi-bin and boom, mailman doesn't work without manual
tweaking.)

We aren't RedHat, we do support partial upgrades.  If we want to avoid
the conflicts line, we have to have both cgi-lib and cgi-bin in place
for two full releases before we can switch to just cgi-lib.

[...]

Our proposed solution is rather to create a /local-cgi ScriptAlias
pointing to /usr/local/lib/cgi-bin, which is where local changes
should go anyway.

-- 
Tollef Fog Heen                                                        ,''`.
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are      : :' :
                                                                      `. `' 
                                                                        `-