Hey Mathieu, On Monday 27 Sep 2004 10:49, Mathieu Roy wrote: > Elfyn McBratney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> tapota : > > Hello, > > > > As part of the Gentoo webapp'isation, it would make life a lot easier if > > there weren't so many per-site values in these files. I'd like to > > suggest moving as many of them as possible into a table in the db so they > > don't require filesystem/shell access (think mass virtual hosting with > > only ftp - no ssh, scp, etc). > > > > I think the frontend-only ones could go straight away, but we'd need an > > easy migration path and access to the old sys_ variables, first. One > > question: procedural or Oo? ;-) > > > > Sound ok for a Savane meets Gentoo branch? > > This does not sounds great to me. Unix system configuration goes in > /etc, not in database, and I'm not sure we should change that.
But Savane is not a Unix application. It's a webapp, and on web servers, not everyone has the luxury of karma on /etc. :-( > First, part of the configuration is needed to access to the > database. Second, Savane should be running with it's conffile even if > the database access is broken. Sure, it would be silly for the database settings to be in the.. database ;-) Other stuff, why not? If you can't connect to the database, you can't do much and a lot will fail (lots of php errors, for a start). If the settings don't exist in the db, set defaults. > I do not expect savane to be working on a free homepage account, with > no shell. It's probably not feasible at all (performances, cronjobs > etc). Neither do I, but why stop people using it like that at such sites? As you said recently, a lot can be done with Savane - you can run a whole project with it. (I've moved all my tasks and other such stuff to it, but, so I remember Savane more now ;-) If people just want Savane to give users a web precense/pim/whatever - let them eat cake, to coin a phrase ;-) > Also, changing the configuration time is a pain for each upgrade, so > it should happen rarely and for good reason. The deprecated section is > here to avoid breaking things -- it's costless to have it. BC is major, but this could be done easily. When you install Savane, it would be a default Savane site (or global/primary/whatever). But, you could also install a secondary site somewhere else. > I do not see any problem during packaging in creating these files (it > looks even more simple to create a conffile than filling a database in > whatever state). > > I strongly suggest to do one thing at a time: packaging should mean > only packaging what exists. All true. What I'm trying to push here is that not everyone has w00t. Not everyone can install stuff in /etc, /usr/local, /whatever. I'm not trying to suggest we get rid of that - not at all, it's very useful for dedicated sites like Gna! and Savannah. But for users, without complete karma on the box, it's also very useful to be able to install in ones homedir, or vsite, etc, etc. So, what I'm trying to propose is work on Savane to enable normal users to install, and use whatever parts they want. If they want the backend and other related stuff to work too, they need to change the path to somewhere they can write to, etc, etc. Best, Elfyn -- Elfyn McBratney beu on irc.freenode.net/savannah.[non]gnu.org PGP Key ID: 0x456548B4 PGP Key Fingerprint: 29D5 91BB 8748 7CC9 650F 31FE 6888 0C2A 4565 48B4
