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

Re: should packages begin using /srv ?



On Monday, 19 December 2005 01:50, Stephen Gran wrote:
> This one time, at band camp, Holger Levsen said:
> > > So my question is simply: should packages begin using /srv now ? What
> > > is the release teams opinion and decission on this ? (Steve commented
> > > on IRC that it would be good to have this decission made by the team
> > > and in an archived media.)
> >
> > I'm still patiently waiting for a reply...
>
> I am not pretending to speak for the release team, so take what I say
> with a load of salt.  My reading of /srv is that it is for the local
> admin, so packages should not ship files in /srv.  A reasonable thing
> might be a script in the package, that creates an instance of something
> (TFTboot, web instance, whatever) under /srv, but actually shipping the
> files under /srv would be a no-no.

My reading is that webpages don't belong to /var/www and in addition (quoting 
from FHS), "/srv ... _should be used as the default location for such data_ 
" (web pages served by the machine). So having the DocumentRoot of our 
default apache installation pointing to /var/www is a no-no-no.

Best regards

-- 
Isaac Clerencia at Warp Networks, http://www.warp.es
Work: <isaac@warp.es>   | Debian: <isaac@debian.org>

Attachment: pgpeILOcQa8bF.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: