Hi, >That would be the ideal solution, but I doubt it. Henri ?
Does Henri (or do you, Henri, since you're reading this ;)) work for/with JPackage.org to generate RPMs? >I do preffer insisting on our layout and having a warning on the site and >at >startup if this is modified. But if Henri and other people preffer >supporting >FHS - I'm fine too, as long as we do define one FHS variant and attempt to >prevent the fragmentation. I'm with you: one layout. >One layout is the best, but 2 is better than one per distro, and we can't >expect RedHat ( or any other distribution ) to define how tomcat should be >installed ( again, httpd is a clear example of what will happen if we do >that ). With tomcat maturing (it's already mature), keeping a stable way to deploy, configure, and setup things is a significant consideration. We have a huge user base that gets troubled and annoyed (justifiably in some cases) when we introduce things like the conf/[engine name]/[host name] structure without warning or sufficient documentation. I'm not saying we were bad, I'm just giving an example. So if we have to have FHS, which would be unfortunate, let's at least make sure it's one consistent variant and update our docs accordingly. Yoav This e-mail, including any attachments, is a confidential business communication, and may contain information that is confidential, proprietary and/or privileged. This e-mail is intended only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed, and may not be saved, copied, printed, disclosed or used by anyone else. If you are not the(an) intended recipient, please immediately delete this e-mail from your computer system and notify the sender. Thank you. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
