Re: apache2/conf.d migration: what should webapp packagers do?
On Wed, March 21, 2012 08:58, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> (dropping bug#664761 from cc)
> Hi Paul,
>
> Paul Wise wrote:
>
>> That looks like a highly inappropriate thing for gitweb to be doing.
>
> What can I say? It works, and it is a conffile so the sysadmin can
I can say that it seems like a reasonable approach to me.
Most web applications take the following approach: (1) ask whether any and
which webserver should be configured; (2) if apache, add an alias with the
package name. This is also what the webapps policy recommends.
Anything more advanced (specific vhosts, authentication, etc) is probably
highly specific to the local configuration and requires conffile editing
anyway, so it's best to leave that to the admin to decide.
I have noticed that users do expect some default configuration and
activation of the package: when I had a package that just ships an example
Apache config but doesn't install it by default, I got frequent bug
reports about that saying that it's not usable out of the box.
Using "Alias" seems like a good default to configure an application in a
way that it's generically usable, but still easily changable.
Cheers,
Thijs
Reply to: