> I tried with the debconf config for tilelite (in the debconf branch) to
> allow the user to setup tilelite in a very flexible way using debconf.
> If you have not checked out that branch, and tried it out, I would
> suggest doing so, as it might help you when looking at configuring
> tilelite (it handles multiple tilesets).
Thanks for this. It may turn out very useful for osm-tile-server!
I've looked at it now more in detail. The config code for tilelite
does not run when I install the package, but I have started graping
what you are doing there by reading the code.
As it is now, osm-tile-server only supports one instance of an OSM
tile server. I would see now if I can make use of some of your config
code in the config for osm-tile-server to make it support multiple
instances. It looks quite sophisticated and nice. :)
I've also now changed to using the apache wsgi interface instead of
just liteserv after looking at your code.
> I guess what I am trying to say above, is that this is an open issue,
> and just needs people to try solutions and keep moving things forward.
I think that it can quickly get messy if both osm-tile-server and
tilelite asks debconf questions by default. May I ask you to at least
lower the priority of the tilelite debconf questions so that they are
not asked on a normal install (if you want to have these questions as
part of tilelite)?
The same goes for the database name question for openstreetmap-carto.
I'm not using that name in osm-tile-server. I'm rather making a copy
of style.xml and replacing the database name with the one from the
osm-tile-server config. To let that be part of debconf for
openstreetmap-carto only confuses the user in this case, and it does
not support multiple instances either. It is also slightly unnecessary
to ask the user multiple time for the database name. Do you have any
objections to lowering the priority of this question?