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

Re: Integrate Knoppix in Debian (was: Re: Debian Enterprise?)

On Sun, 2003-11-30 at 05:18, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2003 at 12:38:29PM +0100, Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
> > > The (3) part is not something that debian-desktop will do since it
> > > boils down to modifying, at leisure, the system's configuration
> > > (/etc directly, since there is not a single point of configuration,
> > > debconf is not an option here).

> > What we *can* do is find the ways that we, as a custom distribution,
> > want to change the configuration files of other packages and then
> > submit wishlist bugs with patches adding low-priority debconf

> However, we are currently viewing debconf as a way to do a _minimum_ 
> configuration of packages. Debconf overuse is usually reported as a bug. We 

Is this seriously the case?

If so, can someone please explain low priority to me - isn't it a
desireable feature to have a common configuration DB??? Anything else
just -feels- like it's not The Right Thing.

> don't want to use, as a distribution, a single point of configuration like 
> debconf.

I don't comprehend why this could be at all a desirable thing. At all.

> I might be wrong or things might have changed. Notice, also that 
> debconf is not even policy so package maintainers can still provide 
> interactive package installations that depend on user input w/o using 

> [1] Policy (3.10.1 Prompting in maintainer scripts) says "should" not 
> "must", so not using debconf for interactive installations is a bug, but 
> not an RC bug.

No one said it was.

And note, Mako wrote "submit wishlist bugs". Which sound appropriate for
given debconf's current "should" status.

I do get that you said you might be wrong. I really would like to see
someone clarify this though. It feels important to having Debian have a
consistent [G]UI for installation, supporting these live CD things as is
being discussed, and just being *sane* from an end user's point of view
(when you have to deal with 13,000+ packages, surely you want to
*completely eliminate* multiple forms of package configuration - it's
the only scalable solution (and debconf (or something like it if it is
so deficient that you are motivated to write a replacement) can have
multiple backends, multiple front ends etc, so we still have
customizability, etc)).


NEW! The Debian Enterprise Project: http://debian-enterprise.org/
Homepage: http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~zenaan/
PGP Key: http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~zenaan/zen.asc
Please respect this email's confidentiality as sensibly warranted.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: