Re: Couchdb package
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 10:33:17PM +0100, David Paleino wrote:
> On Thursday 14 January 2010 22:24:02, Sam Bisbee wrote:
> > As I said before, you can fork something without making code changes to it.
> > It's a fork because the packaging is significantly different than the way
> > it's packaged upstream. I did not mean to suggest that upstream doesn't
> > want people to use CouchDB in the way you're suggesting, but it's packaged
> > upstream to default to a system wide service. As I understand it we are
> > not in the business of changing that unless we have a real technical
> > reason to do so (ie., doesn't meet Debian policy or there's a bug).
>
> Upstream is not doing any packaging at all.
Sorry, I didn't mean packaging in the deb/rpm/* sense but in the "it's a
packaged release" sense. My primary focus in their packaging is their default
configuration and what they support. I don't think we should be changing how
CouchDB behaves out of the box that its creators provide, fixes and
Debian-ization aside.
> It's up to the downstream maintainers, you, deciding how to distribute the
> software :-)
Yes and no. :-)
> Do you have any pointer to this "upstream decision"?
The only "upstream decision" that I know of is that system wide deployment is
their default configuration and there's no built in per-user support that I
know of. I don't know if it was a conscious decision or not, but there it is.
As an aside, I'm not saying that per-user couches isn't interesting (I
especially like the implications for shared hosting environments). I think that
it's going to need better support than what's been proposed though (Sergei's/my
first thoughts with attn. to the list of items,
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-erlang-devel/2009-November/000056.html).
I would encourage someone to go upstream with the changes and see about
implementing them there. Their dev@ would probably be the best bet. I can also
forward it from the "Debian desk" if someone wants me to.
Thanks David,
--
Sam Bisbee
Reply to: