-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 20-06-2005 16:03, Andreas Schuldei wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 02:41:35PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > >>The problem raised here is that debian-edu packages messes with slapd >>conf(ig)files. That cannot (in the Debian we have today, Andreas!) be >>solved by debian-edu using ucf: Debian-edu is not allowed to mess with >>configfiles of other packages, except if those packages provide a tool >>to do so (like debconf). >> >>Please read Debian Policy 10.7.3 and 10.7.4. > > > I work on *changing* Debian and Debian policy to be better able > to cope with todays demands and the future and be still > attractive (and around) for my son or other people to use in ten > years.
So do I. Welcome to the club! But IMHO it makes sense to understand the current policy as part of that work, in order to asure changes are improvements rather than degradation. I believe it makes good sense to disallow one package messing directly with config files of another package. The package maintainer knows best what changes (like changing a file to a symlink) won't blow up maintainance of the package. I believe it makes good sense to disallow packages automating configuration of other packages, until the issues around this is well thought trough: Should config-packages predepend on packages they want to mess with to make sure they are completely installed before messing, or should config-interfaces (like debconf) instead be required to assure that themselves? Should packages wanting conflicting configurations of other packages (like "gnome-rules" and "kde-is-the-best", or "exim4-rules" and "postfix-is-cool") conflict with each other or be mandated to cause an election (as xdm, kdm and gdm does currently for conflicting services)? I believe each config file should be tied to a Debian package, and stray config files should be registered as well (see http://www.debian-administration.org/users/lee/weblog/1 ). Config files not related to a specific daemon or application could be tied to base-config or similar debconf-enabled *-config package. I believe packages like debian-edu-config and debian-edu-install does not belong in standard official Debian packages. Don't get me wrong: I really really want the functionality in Debian, but the current implementation is policy-violating for a reason: they do not behave as expected of packages, so is a ticking bomb on each system they are installed! I believe it is very important that when fixing the issues of distro-level needs we make sure to not overrule package-level maintainance: Debian is a community-driven system with responsibility tied to the packages. [I have more arguments here, but have written way too much already - ask me if you need more on this...]. I am deeply sorry if my pointing to Debian Policy is seen as me wanting to shut people up. On the contrary: I want more people more aware of what Debian *is* (including myself - I am learning it myself as we speak!) to better move forward instead of sideways. - Jonas - -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ - Enden er nær: http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD4DBQFCtxgDn7DbMsAkQLgRAnp2AKCKBv6NZsCqJjd/buICcGNnRqXDxACVED9D mNwB/iRQA6w6vzGftiUgbA== =ASen -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
