Le Mardi 3 Mai 2005 17:39, Alexis Sukrieh a écrit : > * sean finney (seanius@debian.org) disait : > > > What do you mean exactly? In the Bugzilla package, there are a > > > set templates files which have to be shipped with the package. I > > > have a bug report against the fact that when you customize those > > > files, you will lose your changes whenever you upgrade the > > > package. > > > > > > What would you answer to the bug submitter? > > > > this is slightly different problem. if the user is *expected* to > > modify a file, it shouldn't be in /usr/share in the first place, or > > at least marked as a conffile. > > Yes, so, basically, the question is: > > Should we consider the templates (and other static files) > customizable? > > The more I think about that issue, the more I think we should not. I disagree here. Some web apps live by the fact that they are skinnable (think at a blog e.g.). I agree that even if phpmyadmin is skinnable, most users will live with default skin. same for a webmail (up to some point : portal admins may want to make it match the aspect of the portal). And we cannot blame users for that, or deny them the right to use our upgrades, ... no, I really am convinced that templating cannot be forgotten. even if it is a real *pain*. and that is really a specificity of the webapps that make them a real mess to package. If admins ahve to maitain an rsync mirror and god know what else, and that they would have to perform all upgrades manually, etc ... I don't see the point in using debian packages for that. they can achieve that using pristines tarballs. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O OOO http://www.madism.org
Attachment:
pgpmOTotBeprq.pgp
Description: PGP signature