On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 08:18:09AM +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
Le jeudi 28 juin 2007 à 03:02 +0200, Axel Thimm a écrit :
> So actually introducing a fixed layout into /srv party discards its
Please read the start of the thread aga
I wrote the start of the thread ...
I never advocated locking out /srv in a fixed layout.
You did by advocating to hardcode it into the packages.
I advocated making a fixed layout in /srv for our needs,
"Our" needs? How do you define "our"? With my Fedora hat on I say
"our" needs are to fulfill our various certainly non-marginal
different user groups from small home setups to large systems. This is
only accomplished by not applying any "Fedora layout" that is only
chosen because "that's what rpm can do". That's a very poor design
criterion for a layout-free entity.
in a specific part of /srv, letting admins do whatever they want
this the rest of /srv.
I don't care if you want to organise stuff in /srv by domain
sign or dog name. I want the same ability I have on the rest of the
filesystem, preconfigure stuff for users that do not have advanced
The binary you vs me is stupid there's zip reason we can not
create structures in /srv as long as there is a clear partitioning
convention so we do not step on each other foot.
And the clear convention to step not on each other's feet is to not
use any default layout, neither by zodiac, nor your dog's names.
OK, to put this to an end (because we don't produce any new
arguments), we agree that we disagree, and the FPC makes its vote once
its members feel confident that they have the whole picture..
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net