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

Re: Proposal to improve package configuration upgrades

On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 09:28:52 +0100
Dominique Dumont <dominique.dumont@hp.com> wrote:

> Of course, there's no miracle. For the merge to work automatically and
> the result to be valid, the semantic of the configuration file must be
> known by Config::Model. This is done by describing the structure and
> constraints of the configuration file in a model (hence the
> Config::Model name). 
> What do you think about this ?

I don't really know Config::Model. But the main problem I have with the
current system is, that I only see diffs between the currently
installed version and the new package version. 

No what I really would like to see is the diff between the last version
I've merged and the new package version. So changes can easily be seen
(changes in defaults, new/removed parameters or just white-space
changes?) and merging would work without a conflict in most cases.
Similar to like SCMs work.

Config::Model could be useful in addition, but would it support such a


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: