Philip Brown schrieb: > On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 08:45:33PM +0100, Sebastian Kayser wrote: >> .... >> 2) If CSWfoo already has configuration files directly beneath etc/ >> (this i the case for CSWdovecot) i as a package maintainer would feel >> inclined to consolidate these into the etc/cswfoo directory as well. >> On the other hand (and that feeling is stronger) i wouldn't want to >> change configuration file locations as not to break things on package >> updates. >> > > I think that is inappropriate. > My rationale for that being: > > /opt/csw/etc[/foo] (and /etc/opt/csw[/foo] ) > should be where conf files for *running* the software go. > > In contrast, > /opt/csw/etc/CSWfoo > > should be where conf files for configuring the *package* of it goes. > > This is in my mind, for clarity's sake. > if someone is reading the standard documentation on the product, they will > look in /opt/csw/etc/foo, and see all the software-documented files they > expect. If on the other hand, they see a bunch of other things, they may > get confused why they are there.
Ok, we are on the same line here then. When i referred to etc/cswfoo i really meant etc/foo. Sorry for the confusion and thanks for the clarification. > I was thinking that files in /opt/csw/etc/CSWfoo, should only be > applicable > to pkgadd/pkgrm time. > Hence, why in my opinion, the directory should be named after the PKG > name. Yep, just something other than /opt/csw/etc/foo. Sebastian _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
