[Freedombox-discuss] don't sidestep /etc as configuration storage

[Jonas Smedegaard]

Quoting Simo (2013-11-04 15:13:47)
> On Mon, 2013-11-04 at 10:27 +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > Quoting Simo (2013-11-04 03:46:56)
> > > On Sun, 2013-11-03 at 18:54 +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > > > Debian packages generally store site-wide configuration as files 
> > > > below /etc.  That means the maintainers of packages ensure that 
> > > > configurations work and can be smoothly upgraded across releases 
> > > > of those packages.
> > > > 
> > > > It is technically possible to avoid coordinating needs for 
> > > > customization of configuration with package maintainers, by 
> > > > using another registry than files below /etc - e.g. by use of 
> > > > the LDAP registry.
> > > > 
> > > > That's bad! Debian packages is all about maintenance.  
> > > > Sidestepping that is sidestepping the reliability of Debian.
> > > 
> > > To be honest I do not have that great faith about maintenance of 
> > > Debian packages, especially across releases. In my limited use 
> > > I've had way too many breakages of service due to Debian's 
> > > "helpful" policy of meddling in package configuration. The last 
> > > horror story was an upgrade of a system with dovecot, I was so 
> > > upset I nuked Debian and went back to CentOS.
> > 
> > So you suggest to start a project similar to FreedomBox, based on 
> > Centos?
> 
> No.
> 
> >   Or what is your point?
> 
> > My point is that when(!) we choose to rely on Debian, we should do 
> > so also for configuration handling.
> 
> My point is that you need your own configuration handling if you hope 
> to have anything that a non-expert can use. The DEbian configuration 
> management is little more than continuously prompting an expert admin 
> on what to do when there are configuration file changes, that's not 
> configuration management at all, that's just deferring to an expert 
> admin. And I hope the target audience is a little bit broader than 
> that.
> 
> That means having a overall package that drags in the right 
> dependencies and simplifies configuration decisions by abstracting 
> away the details of low level service configuration into an interface 
> manageable by common users, where the hard choices are predetermined.

Thanks for clarifying.

I strongly disagree: I find Debian configuration infrastructure 
perfectly capable of supporting both technical and non-technical users.

Not all Debian packages currently make good use of the infrastructure 
available - but that needs fixing, instead of sidestepping with another 
layer of configuration handling: That requires maintenance - it will 
bitrot and fail!


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/freedombox-discuss/attachments/20131104/af51a3d3/attachment.sig>