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

Re: Possible MBF wrt common, FHS-compliant, default document root for the various web servers

On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 07:04:22PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> the lintian error dir-or-file-in-var-www exists for a long time, and I
> believe that most packages with active maintainers have already been
> split according to the FHS. What I question is whether it is worth the
> effort to move the content of /usr/share/<package> to
> /usr/share/www/<package>:
>  - How many purely static websites do we distribute as Debian packages?
>    (Note that /usr/share/doc/<package> is already served as http://localhost/doc/package/)
>  - How many dynamic websites will start to work out of the box without
>    the need for a specific configuration for each webserver?

I now understand better your argument, thanks for rephrasing. I don't
have an answer, because I haven't done the test, but I do agree that it
would be interesting to know in advance. Still, it is not exactly clear
to me how to test this, how would you automatically discover whether a
package has a static splash screen (note indeed that it is not only
about "purely static" web applications, but also about "regular"
webapps, with a static splash screen).
> I checked at the web application I maintain (emboss-explorer), and in its
> particular case, it would still need an apache.conf file. That is not enough to
> make statistics, so I am just asking if there will be many packages that can
> take advantage of the proposed reorganisation. [And unfortunately source.debian.net
> looks borken again…].

Can you perhaps explain why so?

I frankly hope that with /vendor/ + /usr/lib/cgi-bin/ (which we already
have), and maybe with some symlinks under /vendor/ we will be able to
address quite a lot of issues. It would be interesting to known which
one we can't.

Now that I think of it, probably a per-package data dir would help, but
that can be a tad more tricky due to single-instance of
multiple-instance nature of the webapp in question ...

> Of course, if the use of /usr/share/www/<package> is optional,
> everybody wins.

It is forcibly optional: if you have some static content you should use,
otherwise not.


Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..|  .  |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie
sempre uno zaino ...........| ..: |.... Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: