I just read the first of the two documents and this proposal looks extremely exciting. Actually, I believe it raises (and partially answers) a lot of problems that people face when deploying linux on large sets of computers. >From the philosophical point of view, one thing that comes to mind is that often you might want to explicitly add some hierarchy into the state-less infrastructure/description. What I mean by this is that often various levels of the operating system are dealt with different groups and you want to allow them to interact with minimum effort. Eg if you have a company wide linux base with a group dealing with hardware/security and networking and subgroups of small teams that require some specific software combinations or configuration for their computers, it would be nice to let the first group maintain the core of the systems and let the subgroups make "refinements" over the standard base independently. This is certainly doable up to some level: having a subgroup define their application software settings is fairly easy and (maybe with some inconvenience) seems to be doable with the current scheme. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Theodore Papadopoulo Email: Theodore.Papadopoulo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Tel: (33) 04 92 38 76 01 --------------------------------------------------------------------
