On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 03:55:58PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
sean finney sean...@debian.org writes:
something that hasn't really been brought up (i mentioned it on the
non-webapps thread in -devel already) is that this makes packages
potentially opened in an unconfigured state. unless
hi jan,
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 09:15:43AM +0100, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote:
Not that I'm opposing to what you're saying but... every application in
the archive is configured during the installation process, possibly
asking debconf questions, providing defaults etc. After the installation
it
I haven't read all of the thread yet, but:
On Monday 09 November 2009, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote:
Now, I'm willing to run this, i.e. file bugs against web
servers, wait for them to be fixed, then file bugs against web
applications (if needed, I'm right now looking into a way to
make a
On Sat, Nov 07, 2009 at 03:23:22PM +0100, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote:
Full ack, and I even like /usr/share/www. It's easy to understand and
pretty unprobable that we'd have a package called www in the archive
some day needing this location.
Sorry, I have to disagree with this approach. We would
On Sat, Nov 07, 2009 at 03:23:22PM +0100, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote:
1. If we have a generic location for packages to drop their
html/php/whatever files, like /var/lib/www, all web servers can keep
their DocRoot as /var/www and provide an alias for /var/lib/www, for
instance
On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 12:09:28AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
For new packages, grouping everything in /usr/share/www sounds like a good
idea. The alias name, « vendor », I find a bit disturbing because we do not
sell anything. But picking the name will be the priviledge of the Do-o-crat
Le Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 10:24:39AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 12:09:28AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
Still, having /usr/share/www as a document root does not prevent complex
packages to be fragmented between /usr/share, /usr/lib/cgi-bin/, /var/lib/,
On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 10:21:12AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Sat, Nov 07, 2009 at 03:23:22PM +0100, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote:
I still see a problem with the upgrade path for existing installations.
I might be wrong but I think the most difficult cases are very custom
setups with lots
On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 07:04:22PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
the lintian error dir-or-file-in-var-www exists for a long time, and I
believe that most packages with active maintainers have already been
split according to the FHS. What I question is whether it is worth the
effort to move the
On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 06:15:42PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
I frankly hope that with /vendor/ + /usr/lib/cgi-bin/ (which we already
have), and maybe with some symlinks under /vendor/ we will be able to
address quite a lot of issues. It would be interesting to known which
one we can't.
On Sat, 7 Nov 2009, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote:
Caudium can and will adjust to any standard that the community agrees
upon and it can handle different directories without problem.
I really dont have that much input for how this should be done but leaving
it as it is now is worse.
Thanks for
On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 04:39:06PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 10:21:48AM +0100, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote:
Okay, I understand. Now, I see two ways actually to solve this.
1. If we have a generic location for packages to drop their
html/php/whatever files, like
Le Sat, Nov 07, 2009 at 03:23:22PM +0100, Jan Hauke Rahm a écrit :
I still see a problem with the upgrade path for existing installations.
I might be wrong but I think the most difficult cases are very custom
setups with lots of changes by the local admin. I'm thinking of e.g.
Thanks for your response, Charles!
On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 12:09:28AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
As a maintainer of a web application, I share your worries. I never had any
user request to make it work out of the box with alternative web servers, so I
guess that my users have nothing to gain
14 matches
Mail list logo
