On 2014-02-14 09:25, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 04:02:47PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> That seems reasonable, and in that case, something like "fedora-presets"
> and "fedora-workstation-presets", etc., seems appropriate, and the
> corresponding release package could pull them in.
What about my proposal to drop the preset directly onto the file
system (but
in /etc rather than in /usr/share as we do now) in the live
kickstarts?
After all, a file in /etc doesn't really need to be owned by some
package.
(Having it unowned also means sysadmins can easily customize it by
editing
it directly, as opposed to creating their own file in /etc.)
I think in most caess, it's actually _nicer_ to create your own
overrides
file rather than editing a big monolith one, bceause with the
monolithic
approach you have to deal with merging changes in areas you didn't care
about.
I'm also not in favor of adding _more_ "canonical voodoo" to kickstart
files
-- that is, stuff which is effectively mandatory in every %post
section.
Very much +1. Putting it in kickstarts is a worse tying problem than
putting it in a package: it ties this configuration mechanism to a
system for creating deliverables, which is what kickstart is. We need to
be moving away from having configuration in kickstarts, not adding more.
Blue sky thinking aside, keeping a reasonably static, distro-independent
set of defaults in systemd and then two layers of Fedora overlays (one
project-wide, one per-Product or per-product) in packages seems
obviously the right design to me. I agree with Dennis that
fedora-release is not necessarily the place for this; apart from the
points he raised, these don't seem to be a part of 'defining the
release' in any case, and the number of people who can commit to
fedora-release's upstream is fairly limited (and may be required to stay
that way).
To me, putting this kind of thing in a config-only package is a nice
approach, because if we ever do build the free-floating configuration
layer Colin suggests - not tied to the deliverable-creation layer or the
file-deployment layer - it should make migration fairly easy. Having
this kind of configuration in mixed packages or in kickstarts would seem
to make the migration trickier.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
