[WBEL-devel] splitting off resolver config files into separate packages (was: Respin 1 Status)

On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 08:47:21AM -0400, William Hooper wrote:
> Axel Thimm said:
> > I don't know how intrusive you want to be with WBEL vs RHEL differences,
> > but I would suggest to split off the config files out of up2date/yum/apt
> > etc., so that you can upgrade the config files separately, and even allow
> > site admins to craft their own config file rpms to deploy locally.
> 
> Why?  The config files will not be changed if they have been edited.

No, that's not the issue. It is for being able to update the config
files with more flexibility. As a site admin it will be easier for me
to rebuild whitebox-package-config containing (only) the config files
for the resolvers than to rebuild up2date/apt/yum etc. binaries as
well.

> > That's how ATrpms deals with the config files for apt and yum...
> 
> And judging by the mailing list threads is a constant source of
> irritation...

Not really, it is simply something that is being muttered about, for
the sake of creating FUD. It obviously works ;)

Similar things have happened to named/bind where you have
configuration in different replacable packages. Finer granularity
increases modularity, flexibility and reusability.

Anyway that was just a thought. I don't know how often the config
files would change in WB's context. For ATrpms (including more than a
dozen different repos in the configs) they change several times a
week, so splitting off the config files was a must, especially in
times before the debuginfo package splits, where apt for instance was
several MBs large.
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFAxbo8QBVS1GOamfERAmbeAJ4h6HIidEbYia4fUQ2BENGk1A4JUQCfWg21
HE7DmrzwrbrXRTgXLBnfpSI=
=tP9l
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----