On 11/03/2004 02:22:13 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
I'm still not sure why this discussion is going on here...at the
distribution level.
Individual major projects will have to buy into this to be useful. The
distribution maintainers is not going to be able to dictate to
individual projects how to craft configuration schemes. Are there on
going discussions upstream inside major component projects like xorg
or apache about this approach?
The developer of Elektra will soon be releasing a patch to x.org that will create the elektra database from the conf file if it doesn't exist. Right now he's collecting different x.org conf files in order to test it, then he'll release the patch to the elektra list, then after testing it will eventually get submitted to x.org
I think his patch to init has already been submitted to x.org and either has been approved or is awaiting approval - with init, applying the patch doesn't build an elektrified init unless you specify that's what you want, and I suspect that will be the norm for most packages - so that elektra isn't forced on any distribution, but becomes an option.
In that respect, the fedora devel list is a good place to discuss it - because fedora will need to choose wether or not it wants to use elektrified builds of the apps. Also - some fedora specific stuff needs to be elektrified, such as the init scripts (I'm sort of working on the network init script now - which will completely alleviate the need for /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts) and of course, kudzu and the sysconfig-blah python scripts would need to be ported.
So some discussion I think is healthy on this list, though maybe it is a bit premature, since there isn't (imho) critical mass yet of elektrified applications to make switching worth it.
