On 12-01-07 at 09:42am, Russ Allbery wrote: > Jonas Smedegaard <d...@jones.dk> writes: > > On 12-01-07 at 09:15am, Russ Allbery wrote: > >> Tollef Fog Heen <tfh...@err.no> writes: > >>> ]] Daniel Baumann > >> > >>>> it's not policy incompliant if e.g. php5 would install > >>>> /etc/apache2/sites-enabled/whatever containing a virtualhost > >>>> definition. the reason why nobody would do that, is, that it's > >>>> just wrong and unreasonable to do such a thing (where e.g. > >>>> aliases and directory directives are a reasonable thing to do for > >>>> a web application). > > >>> Having, say, mediawiki, ask using debconf if you would like a > >>> vhost set up with the host name wiki.$domain would be completely > >>> sane, IMO. If you don't want it, just tell the config script no. > > >> Agreed, provided that the default action is no. > > > I too feel that no webapp package should add vhosts by default. > > > But does it violate Policy? > > > The package jwchat currently enable a vhost by default, I believe. > > I'm not sure that it really violates Policy, mostly because we don't > have any Policy guidance about web applications at all right now. But > I think it's fairly obvious that it's not a sane thing to do to camp > on a piece of URL space without any consultation with the local > administrator. Even more so than file system space under /srv, the > URL namespace served by a web server is frequently under tight control > and needs to be carefully managed according to rules and conventions > that the package has no way of knowing.
Well, in the case of jwchat it is not so clear cut: the user _is_ asked for a hostname for the vhost, and offered to opt-out by writing "none", but default is not none. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
