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

Re: dotdee: a proposal for improving conffile management in Debian

On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> Dustin Kirkland wrote:
>> I've had that feeling, I know.  And I'm feeling that way about more
>> and more and more utilities.  I just don't think I, you, or any of us
>> is going to actually getting around to "fixing" every service to
>> support a .d style configuration structure.
>> And that's at the crux of this discussion (whether it's dotdee that
>> solves this, or something else completely different).  I'm
>> wondering/hoping/thinking about other ways we could approach this
>> problem, as a distribution
> Here's some lower-hanging fruit:
>        http://bugs.debian.org/32877

Heh :-)  Can any 12-year-old bug be considered low hanging fruit?  :-)

In any case, I see that bug 32877 has an updated patch as of Wed, 23
Mar 2011, from Vasily i. Redkin, but I don't see any feedback yet on
that latest patch.

>        http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.debian.devel.dpkg.general/11409

I read through this thread too.  Very interesting, thoughtful layout
of conffile tracking, if a bit complex.  But it looks to me like the
developer trying to solve this problem is left hanging since February

> It needs someone willing to go through the patches, resubmit them,
> and take or give feedback from the list to simplify and polish them.
> The result would, in my humble opinion, already be much, much better
> than what we have today.

Hmm, well, neither of these itches are quite identical to our
particular itch, and the proposed/pending/abandoned(?) solutions don't
quite solve the problem I need to solve.  And I'd hate to spend time
simplifying and polishing them entirely in vain.  If the maintainers
have a punch list of exactly what needs to be solved to get such
solutions committed, I'd be glad to help out.  But unfortunately I
don't have an open ended schedule on this.


Dustin Kirkland
Ubuntu Core Developer

Reply to: