Re: Binaryless uploads [Was: FTBFS: architecture all packages]
On Tue, 19 Aug 2003, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Yep. And given that upstream offers webmin as an all-in-one solution to
> web-based management needs, I don't really see any reason why they
> shouldn't be kept lock-step with one another.
As Debian developers our goal is to make an integrated OS which works
according to our own internal logic. From that perspective some of the
choices made by upstream maintainers are not optimal. For instance, one
of the reasons all the webmin modules are distributed together is because
there is no cross-platform dependency mechanism so the author doesn't know
what you've got. So he just installs everything and its up to you to
switch off the stuff you don't need. Thanks to dpkg, we don't need to do
that. If e.g. I'm using postfix, there is absolutely no reason why I
should need to have the webmin sendmail module installed.
> I particularly don't see
> why it's good that bugs in this group of packages themselves be ignored
> for testing processing of the others.
>
> Does webmin even provide any standard APIs that guarantee particular
> modules will work with particular versions of webmin? Version slip here
> seems like it could pose a serious problem, even *beyond* the usual
> partial upgrades question.
>
No guarantee is given but so far backward compatability has been pretty
good fwiw.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar@debian.org>
La Salle Debain - http://www.braincells.com/debian/
Reply to: