On 02/04/11 18:36, Jeff Johnson wrote: > On Apr 2, 2011, at 1:23 PM, Raphaël Pinson wrote: >>> IMHO, I think the way it's done right now, keeping lenses in a central >>> repository, is the way to go. We can find other projects that works this >>> way, like vim, where most syntax highlighting belongs to the vim >>> package, not the upstream one, excepted for few. >> >> When my vim syntax doesn't exactly fit the file I'm editing, it's >> frustrating at most, but not a big issue. When an Augeas lens doesn't >> parse or write a conffile properly, it's a major issue. I think we >> should encourage Augeas lenses to be associated with usptream software >> as much as possible. > > There are two issues: > > Who maintains lenses? > How are lenses updated and distributed? > > that have perhaps different answers. I'd suggest foccussing > on a distribution scheme for lenses, perhaps something lightweight > like gems/eggs, without worrying about maintainership quite yet.
I can't really see that such a system's needed, we already have the packaging infrastructure for shipping the applications themselves - lenses are just part of this and are very much tied to the application. The examples of gems and eggs serve a different purpose, to distribute entire libraries or applications. Vim syntax files don't need a separate packaging system, why does Augeas? I wouldn't like to see yet another package manager and format.. 73, -- Dominic Cleal Red Hat Consulting m: +44 (0)7818 512168 _______________________________________________ augeas-devel mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/augeas-devel
