<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 2 March 2011 11:01, Jonas Smedegaard <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dr@jones.dk">dr@jones.dk</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im">On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 08:10:57AM +0000, Matt Willsher wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
On 1 March 2011 22:33, Jonas Smedegaard <<a href="mailto:dr@jones.dk" target="_blank">dr@jones.dk</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 08:04:02PM +0000, Matt Willsher wrote:</blockquote></blockquote></div></blockquote><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Is it a viable business model? That will sell enough units to build a momentum? I'm not even going to concern myself with that one.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Me neither - I have opinions (which lead me to this lengthy conversation) but consider myself a lousy businessman.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Me too which I why I'm a salaried employee in an area not all that close to my heart :(</div>
<div> </div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div class="im">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Ultimately I'm more interested in the under laying infrastructure than the applications that sit on top of it.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Heh. I guess most if not all of us wish we could just concentrate on parts of the puzzle.<br>
<br>
Problem there is, that even leaving this whole discussion of what kind of services to offer, there is still a big difference in what underlying infrastructure is needed for e.g. a write-from-scratch Node- or CoffeeScript-based set of web apps and e.g. bulky-but-existing-today apps that are integrated tightly only at the backend (e.g. all using POSIX passwd and groups instead of own databases).<br>
<br>
But waiting for the designers, who wait for the coders, who wait for the designers, won't get us far.<br>
<br>
I have some experience in setting up some old-style "bulky" services, and intend to work in that direction for now. Others are welcome to either join me, reuse parts of the tools and infrastructure I try put together but go in other directions, or work completely in parallel.<br>
<br>
I do not see it as waste of time to do multiple things in parallel.<div class="im"><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Actually, of your examples mentioned above, the Debian packaging of sudo now (since Squeeze) offers a config.d mechanism that other packages can hook into, and packaging of apache has for some time offered a (better!) combination of config.d and symlink-enable-disable script.<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
But something still needs to managed though linked files.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
What? Why? Try provide an example.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
I have 5 users in my household. I have 1 admin, 2 power users and 3 users. Those groups each have different privileges mapped out in sudo. The power users are allowed to restart apache and kick off backup. The admin can become ultimate root. All valid users can map to one central user to manage a bittorrent server.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Ok, so in your household you are sysadmin.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I am but how could this case possibly be configured by the Debian sudo package? Or what if the roles of the people in the household change? Or what if more people are needed or a new role?</div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Debian Policy §10.7.3 contains:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
The scripts [which are embedded into a package and invoked during install and removal] are not required to configure every possible option for the package, but only those necessary to get the package running on a given system. Ideally the sysadmin should not have to do any configuration other than that done (semi-)automatically by the `postinst' script.</blockquote>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>I believe this is a naive view of how systems work and if followed to its ultimate conclusion removes freedoms and limits choice. I did find the debconf overview page on the Debian site and it struck me as an incomplete. I will read more on the subject as I think I believe in Debian's aims and I think I would like to believe in its aims. I've drifted through distributions long enough now to want to find one I can help.</div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Hope that helps.<br>
<br>
And hope you will change your mind and work _with_ Debian also on this front, rather than "hacking on top"!</blockquote><div><br></div><div>I prefer to view it as developing on top. Debian, RHEL, Solaris, AIX etc are the important foundations. I just don't see how a software package can become all things to all people with out additional glue. </div>
</div>