On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 12:23:29AM -0400, Ron Wilson wrote: > On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 9:38 AM, Will Parsons <varro@nodomain.invalid>wrote: > > > This kind of stuff isn't a "project", and you don't > > need the extra stuff that Fossil (or Git, Mercurial, Bazaar, > > Subversion, or CVS) provide. I've tracked system files for over a > > decade with RCS (and before that with SCCS) and see no reason to > > change. > > > > I disagree. Very often system changes have to be coordinate across several > config files. Most distributions have admin tools to take care of this, but > don't track the history of the changes. For most uses, this is fine. > > Where I work, the IT people already use a tool like Tripwire to monitor the > status (including ownership and permissions) of system critical directories > and files. Another part of this tool is used to reset the permissions, > ownership, etc of these files when changes are made. Because of this, they > can - and do - use Fossil to track system configuration changes. > > By using this combination of distribution provided tools, a few custom > tools, the Tripwire like tool and Fossil, they actually have more and > better control of configuration. And they save the company several $10k per > year in licensing fees for commercial system management suites.
What are the chances you could produce a description of how this setup is used such that it would provide a howto for setting up similar systems in other people's networks, or convince someone else to write such a thing? This could make for an excellent article somewhere. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
