Re: RFS: opus, uuwaf
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi Vincent,
Vincent Bernat wrote:
>>> install uuwaf? If they want to configure database themselves,
>>> dbconfig-common will ask them about this.
>
>> The reason is that some other applications we have depend upon the
>> framework, but don't use the preferences system. For example, we have a
>> system that brokers exchanges between our systems and the university
>> infrastructure - via webservices, it has a very simple UI for testing
>> and debugging, but doesn't use the preferences system.
>
> Well, I understand the purpose, but from a Debian point of view, this
> package is useless and should be merged. I understand that this will
> imply more work for your internal work since you will have to continue
> to maintain privately separate packages.
>
> Maybe someone else may give another point of view on this problem, so
> you may want to wait a bit if you want to keep this package.
It's no problem for now, but the plan is that we will release our other
apps hopefully for inclusion into the archive, and it's really in
preparation for that. I can merge them in the meantime of course.
>>> Since you can break the webserver configuration by using Alias directive
>>> in Apache configuration, you should leave it commented. If the user
>>> wants to respect your alias, he will uncomment it.
>
[..]
> Again, I will not fight against this. Most packages keep aliases
> commented in the default installation but I don't see this as a strong
> requirement. It is unlikely that you break anything by shadowing but
> just note that common practice says that Alias should be commented
> out. For example:
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=476162
Hmm, I do ship an example vhost file, and I'll give some thought as to
whether I can be more intelligent about this.
>>> You have a bogus postinst/postrm. It is better to remove them.
>
>> I do? Both scripts seem to do important stuff to me, no?
>
> debian/postinst and debian/postrm?
Oh, is this in the source itself you mean? I didn't see them appearing
in any of the .debs themselves.
Thanks again, getting through your list well here.
CT.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFILu710SwfPjLnaZYRArgsAKDuEjCv4dwNumNIflslTfzcfRQbAQCg8GdK
UdfDUf3F9FvVMj2cBPGKp6A=
=aMIA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: