-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 20-05-2005 21:14, C. Gatzemeier wrote: > [Reply to a message originally posted on [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Am Friday 20 May 2005 16:06 schrieb Jonas Smedegaard: > >>Only solution as I see it is that Debian adopts metaquestions like >>"which sound daemon to use as default (if any)?" - similarly to the >>current choice of desktop manager (between KDM, GDM and XDM). > > > For a start it should be enough to introduce such meta settings within a > configuration management tool or system. Such as CFG or the "tweaks".
For a start, yes, but it is not a solution: Debian Policy section 10.7.4, paragraph 2, says: > The maintainer scripts must not alter a `conffile' of _any_ package, > including the one the scripts belong to. So the long-term goal of the tweaks project is to no longer be needed, but the tweaks be adopted by each related official Debian package and possible included as shared debconf questions. I expect it to take a long time to absorb all clever package (ab)use into the official package maintainance, however. > From a short glimpse I could not tell how modularized "tweaks" are. I.e. if > maintanance of config file syntax-specific things and default settings for > example can be separated. The project as seen on Alioth currently only contains a small chunk of old messy tweaks I wrote myself, so don't try to get and understanding from looking at it (the tweaks are useful, however - I use some of them actively on production networks). Best place to get a glimpse of concrete tweaks is looking at FAI. We are still waiting for the separation of the tweaks into its own independent Debian package, but as Holger wrote it is technically possible to install today the full FAI package without the recommends... > It's probably a good idea to go with whatever we can get a broad consensus > and > support with. > > If a common debian-custom effort could contemplate to also include the needs > of GUI end-users, scripting admins, even app developers and other distros > there are already some developers that wanted to start dcontrol along the > original CFG ideas for debian. > http://wiki.debian.net/index.cgi?DebianControlCenter I think I disagree. The goal of tweaks is to be absorbed by Debian and thus no longer needed. Its aim is to hack(!) in Debian configuration with as few surprises as possible for local admins. It can coexist with Debian as is, and adopted slowly by each package maintainer as they see fit. I believe the goal of CFG is to stay alive and be an extra layer of configuration management, integrated into the whole chain by tha Debian package maintainers, officially hackable by CDD-providers and officially maintainable by local admins. A much nicer goal, but also a more complex one to achieve: It needs to be adopted generally by Debian! - 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 iD8DBQFCkYjPn7DbMsAkQLgRAhaeAJ9mHQFzfH6orGVOv8K+bnVGU638ZACfV1bK w8DIgrUL8oRzcPu0VpEFbJs= =OISm -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
