On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 06:18:43PM +0200, Michael wrote: > Lennart, > > > On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 02:45:27AM +0200, Michael wrote: > > > (i think you wanted to write "didn't" here ?) > > > > > > Wouldn't it be funny to ask developers for a downgrade converter :) > > > > > > It's an interesting question if there will be any 'standard' > > > configuration syntax some day (maybe XML based?) and if up- and > > > downgrades can convert them rather easily then, both hither and forth... > > > > XML does not help anything. It is just something that lets you store a > > tree of config in a flat text file. Nothing more. The meaning of the > > tree is still a problem. Anyone that thinks XML solves all config > > parsing problems and makes files underversal and supported clearly has > > no idea what XML is. That would make Microsoft very happy however. > > > > A downgrade quite simply requires a time machine. After all the > > developer has to write support for converting a future format into a > > current format when you downgrade. The new version has the ability to > > upgrade old versions to new, and that is of course tested. It does not > > have the ability to convert back (and to what version)? At least in > > debian packages, it is the package being installed that is responsible > > for any conversions, not the one being removed, so on a downgrade the > > newer package doesn't do the conversion, and it would be the only one > > that could know how to do it (although it would probably have very little > > testing, if it was done at all). > > True. > > It is not really about XML, it is about a standard for configurations and the > file format is only a start, the real work starts beyond that,. But with not > even that start... > > Theoretically there could be an upgrade/downgrade manager which would be > called by the new or the downgraded (to be removed) package. As is aid, it's > a technical problem and as such it could be solved. It's just a huge effort. > That's why one would start thinking of a solution, if at all, then only if it > would apply to all packages, not only a few. > > But hey this not a devel list and maybe my point is getting slightly off > topic. Perhaps we should talk about real world solutions instead...for > example, i would be interested if that system roll back works in M$, i've > never tried it.
There's a discussion on the monotone-devel mailing list about putting /etc under revision control. Of course one of the problems there is that Debian packages do some configuring when being installed, so there aren't files for a vendor branch anywhere in sight. -- hendrik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
