> I tried with the debconf config for tilelite (in the debconf branch) to > allow the user to setup tilelite in a very flexible way using debconf. > If you have not checked out that branch, and tried it out, I would > suggest doing so, as it might help you when looking at configuring > tilelite (it handles multiple tilesets).
Thanks for this. It may turn out very useful for osm-tile-server! I've looked at it now more in detail. The config code for tilelite does not run when I install the package, but I have started graping what you are doing there by reading the code. As it is now, osm-tile-server only supports one instance of an OSM tile server. I would see now if I can make use of some of your config code in the config for osm-tile-server to make it support multiple instances. It looks quite sophisticated and nice. :) I've also now changed to using the apache wsgi interface instead of just liteserv after looking at your code. > I guess what I am trying to say above, is that this is an open issue, > and just needs people to try solutions and keep moving things forward. I think that it can quickly get messy if both osm-tile-server and tilelite asks debconf questions by default. May I ask you to at least lower the priority of the tilelite debconf questions so that they are not asked on a normal install (if you want to have these questions as part of tilelite)? The same goes for the database name question for openstreetmap-carto. I'm not using that name in osm-tile-server. I'm rather making a copy of style.xml and replacing the database name with the one from the osm-tile-server config. To let that be part of debconf for openstreetmap-carto only confuses the user in this case, and it does not support multiple instances either. It is also slightly unnecessary to ask the user multiple time for the database name. Do you have any objections to lowering the priority of this question? Best regards, Ruben
