public inbox for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kalin KOZHUHAROV <kalin@thinrope.net>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 20 /srv - Services Home Directory Support
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 00:26:50 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <43C12F3A.4030408@thinrope.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <43BEE892.6070504@gentoo.org>

Luca Barbato wrote:
> I'm thinking about adding the srvdir[1] global useflag.
> 
> Scream if I miss some discussion preventing it.
> 
> (fenice[2] will use it, that's why I'm adding it)
> 
> lu
> 
> [1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0020.html#implementation
> [2] http://packages.gentoo.org/search/?sstring=fenice
> 

Hi all,
not a dev, but please bear with me :-)


>From [1] above:

GLEP:	20
Title:	/srv - Services Home Directory Support
Version:	1.2
Last-Modified:	2004/11/11 21:35:53
Author:	Stuart Herbert <stuart at gentoo.org>, Rob Holland <tigger at gentoo.org>
Status:	Approved
Type:	Standards Track
Content-Type:	text/x-rst
Created:	09-Feb-2004
Post-History:	21-Feb-2004, 11-Nov-2004

It is 2006, any updates on this GELP?

Just a quick look turned out a 404 error on the FHS2.3 link. ( http://www.pathname.com/fhs/ ?)

I am not very read in LSB, but just saw there is a 3.x version...
What about LSB 3.x? Is it the same recomendation?

Although I run quite a bunch of services on a few boxes, I don't see this whole idea (/srv).
I read the GLEP, I read [FHS#srv] but still. And it says:
    "The methodology used to name subdirectories of /srv is unspecified
     as there is currently no consensus on how this should be done."

So how does Gentoo implement it?

[FHS#svg]	http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#SRVDATAFORSERVICESPROVIDEDBYSYSTEM

And as the GLEP talks about webapps, what will an upgrade of a webapp (say Bugzilla) to/from srv?
I feel it breaking and user screaming.


And a few general comments:

Hmm, the GLEP index page [a] shows GLEP 20 with status "SA" which according to the legend is
"Standards Track + Accepted". The [1] above has status "Approved" which might be the same, but why
is not there consistency in terms?

If it is approved/accepted doesn't it mean it is implemented by somebody?

[a]	http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/

Kalin.

-- 
|[ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ]|
+-> http://ThinRope.net/ <-+
|[ ______________________ ]|
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



  reply	other threads:[~2006-01-08 15:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-01-06 22:00 [gentoo-dev] GLEP 20 /srv - Services Home Directory Support Luca Barbato
2006-01-08 15:26 ` Kalin KOZHUHAROV [this message]
2006-01-09  2:11   ` Luca Barbato
2006-01-09  8:05     ` Stuart Herbert
2006-01-09 10:31       ` Luca Barbato

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=43C12F3A.4030408@thinrope.net \
    --to=kalin@thinrope.net \
    --cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox