On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 06:46:42PM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Samstag, 31. Oktober 2009, sean finney wrote: > > if it's regenerable, then i'd say /var/cache/munin/something is the > > right place, and if isn't /var/lib/munin/something. if you seperate > > the things that the user might want to configure (css, etc), where's > > the problem[1]? > that it's butt ugly and work for no gain? plus, seperating is not supported > upstream, so it will need patching for no gain... > i'm absolutly not convinced this is the right solution. I think that the right solution is to not have web apps in our archive unless they can be made to conform with policy's requirements. If a web app isn't going to comply with the FHS, that's fine - but that web app doesn't need to be in the Debian archive. If you think it's "butt ugly" for your web app package to behave in a manner consistent with all the other packages in the archive, we clearly have different views when it comes to aesthetics. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature