Il giorno sab 26 set 2020 alle ore 14:48 Andre Heider <a.hei...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > > On 26/09/2020 12:54, Florian Eckert wrote: > > Hello Andre, > > > > thanks for your remarks, but I have to say this is a master branch and > > this is *not* a stable branch! > > The current implementation is not maintainable so I thought we have to > > refactor this package. > > If something is changed then something can also be broken. > > This is not intended but can happen. > > > >> but the non existing backwards compatibility sucks though. This move > >> breaks every installation relying on a provider which now moved to the > >> new package. > > > > There will always be new packages and you have to adapt. > > The other possibility was to leave the new files in the ddns-scripts > > package. > > This would have increased the size of the package! > > Then others would have been upset about the size of the package. > > How to do it there is always someone who doesn't like it! > > How about a package for each provider? Then you don't need to whip up > your own update script, which needs special handling everywhere else. > Just use the opkg infrastructure like everything else. > > If you want to keep backward capability, you could then > * move the main script to a "core" package > * create an "all" package, which just depends on all providers > * make the package of the old name depend on those two > > That way, the ddns setup doesn't break for updates. >
This is what we will do (to quickly fix the problem the ddns-script will depend on the "all" script package. This way we can keep the core and the service file separate and save compatibility). Creating a package for each service is massive. It would mean 73+ new package that just contain a json file. > > > >> And the `ddns` command is basically just a stripped down opkg in sh. > > > > Not everyone needs all service providers. > > Therefore the possibility to download the providers and not to install > > the package. > > It is also possible that the service urls change during the life cycle > > of the software. > > This can be updated by downloading the service files. > > > >> I think this needs to be more user friendly and less setup breaking. > > > > As I said, thanks for the feedback I and Ansual are working on it. > > > > Regards, > > > > Florian > > > _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
