On Mon, Dec 23, 2024 at 08:23:33AM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Sat, Dec 21, 2024 at 04:38:46PM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 08:37:33AM -0600, rhys wrote: > > > > Right now, the model we have is "some packages use the empty /etc model, > > > > some packages install commented-out defaults, and there's no > > > > consistency". I'd love to move to the model of "all packages use > > > > whichever model the sysadmin prefers".
> no one has a time to make non-upstream > compliant changes (some of which might require making semantic changes > in how config files work I am not suggesting rewriting the handling of configuration files in software, or modifying the software in any way. That's an independent change and one that requires convincing upstream. I am suggesting that, for software which *already* provides an example/template configuration file (whether in /etc or in /usr/share/doc), *and* which does something vaguely sensible without having that file installed, we standardize the paths in which Debian packages install those example/template configuration files, and provide an easy way for sysdamins to decide whether those files get installed to /etc or just stay in /usr/share/doc. That would *only* be a change to Debian packaging, standardizing the locations in which files get installed for consistency.
