On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 05:24:21PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: > By tied in directly, I meant that the client would have to be a > configuration tool as well as a package management tool.
I wasn't going that far. I'm not asking for a pkg configuration tool. Re-read my posts for what I'm asking for. > I would much rather see a generic configuration tool that could tie > into the package database than see the configuration process become > part of the pkg client. That's fine. > That's just my personal view though. I don't disagree. > > Exactly. It can be a separate tool. I have no objection to that, > > provided that there's a standard tool that all package developers who > > need it can use, and which provides a useful API and UI. > > What I could see, and that I do think is valuable, and unique is a way > for a user of pkg to see which packages "need configuration" or > whether they are using the "default configuration". That might be an > interesting idea to pursue later on... You're coming around to my view. Excellent :) > > This thread has dragged on and been inconclusive. I think the best > > thing to do here is let this issue drop, and when either you or I or > > someone else needs this, then we can develop it and contribute it. > > I have to agree for the moment. Despite appearances, I do wish to see > this issue resolved amicably. I just don't have a good feeling about > any of the possible solutions at present. Sure. We agree to disagree (though I'm not sure anymore that we do) and defer deferred actions. _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
