[Freedombox-discuss] don't sidestep /etc as configuration storage
Quoting Simo (2013-11-04 15:13:47)
> On Mon, 2013-11-04 at 10:27 +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > Quoting Simo (2013-11-04 03:46:56)
> > > On Sun, 2013-11-03 at 18:54 +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > > > Debian packages generally store site-wide configuration as files
> > > > below /etc. That means the maintainers of packages ensure that
> > > > configurations work and can be smoothly upgraded across releases
> > > > of those packages.
> > > >
> > > > It is technically possible to avoid coordinating needs for
> > > > customization of configuration with package maintainers, by
> > > > using another registry than files below /etc - e.g. by use of
> > > > the LDAP registry.
> > > >
> > > > That's bad! Debian packages is all about maintenance.
> > > > Sidestepping that is sidestepping the reliability of Debian.
> > >
> > > To be honest I do not have that great faith about maintenance of
> > > Debian packages, especially across releases. In my limited use
> > > I've had way too many breakages of service due to Debian's
> > > "helpful" policy of meddling in package configuration. The last
> > > horror story was an upgrade of a system with dovecot, I was so
> > > upset I nuked Debian and went back to CentOS.
> > So you suggest to start a project similar to FreedomBox, based on
> > Centos?
> > Or what is your point?
> > My point is that when(!) we choose to rely on Debian, we should do
> > so also for configuration handling.
> My point is that you need your own configuration handling if you hope
> to have anything that a non-expert can use. The DEbian configuration
> management is little more than continuously prompting an expert admin
> on what to do when there are configuration file changes, that's not
> configuration management at all, that's just deferring to an expert
> admin. And I hope the target audience is a little bit broader than
> That means having a overall package that drags in the right
> dependencies and simplifies configuration decisions by abstracting
> away the details of low level service configuration into an interface
> manageable by common users, where the hard choices are predetermined.
Thanks for clarifying.
I strongly disagree: I find Debian configuration infrastructure
perfectly capable of supporting both technical and non-technical users.
Not all Debian packages currently make good use of the infrastructure
available - but that needs fixing, instead of sidestepping with another
layer of configuration handling: That requires maintenance - it will
bitrot and fail!
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
[x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 490 bytes