linux registry (no, not that again!)

[Jeff Spaleta]

On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 16:01:42 -0200, Avi Alkalay <avibrazil at gmail.com> wrote:
> I was expecting more discussion on this issues, since I believe they
> are the strongest to slow down Linux ecosystem evolution and user
> friendlyness.

I just don't see the point of discussing this as something ready for
inclusion in Fedora Core.
I think discussion on this at the distribution level is premature if
upstream projects do not yet have releases that use the configuration
functionality elektra provides.  What we are going to get if we have
the discussion now, is a lot of opinion and very little hard evidence
or common experience to draw on, what we get now is an argument.

I see two paths to bring about useful discussion about inclusion in Core.  
1) Elektra developers work closely upstream projects to make elektra
essential or runtime optional side by side with traditional
configuration. Once upstream projects push out releases that require
elektra then fedora core will have a strong reason to include it as
well as upstream rationale to support the technical benefits of
inclusion.

2) put elektra packages and related tools IN fedora.us as a community
packager and encourage Fedora users to install and configure there
systems to use elektra. Building a track record of usage from
fedora.us packages (aka Fedora Extras) provides a path towards long
term integration and rationale through common experience to support
inclusion.

The way forward is to reduce the maintainership burden on Core package
maintainers as elektra is intriduced to the userbase. You do this
either by making upstream responsible for changes needed to have
projects work with elektra, or you introduce elektra and related
conversion tools as a Fedora Extras package set and get the userbase
to start playing with it and provide a trackrecord of feedback to
prove its worth the effort to integrate into Core later. Do what you
can now to aim for inclusion in fc6.

-jef