On Sat, 31 Jan 2009, Hugo van der Kooij wrote:
Christoph Maser wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 28.01.2009, 12:22 +0100 schrieb Erik Wasser:
Ok, there are no stupid question: What do mean with 'transition'?
The change from the now combined package to the then split-up packages.
A simple update would then lead to the webaplication being removed as it
is no longer part of the nagios paackge. So most useres would have to
install nagios-web additionally.
Create 3 packages.
- nagios-core : What ever you need for monitoring only
- nagios-web : For those that need web acces to the results
- nagios : Simple wrapper package that needs both of the above
I am not in favor of splitting the package on the basis that it contains
something that not everyone needs. If one takes this idea to the extreme,
package management can become a nightmare.
There needs to be a balance between ease of use, necessity and complexity.
For me there have been a few reasons to split a package:
- standard practice (eg. putting development stuff in a -devel package)
- size concerns (eg. the package becomes too big where only parts are useful)
- libraries used by other packages (but also contains a big application)
- upstream provides multiple sources
- data files with different release cycle (eg. games often have music and
artwork released in different cycles)
In this case I only see a real need for splitting when the web-part is
considerably big (and optional). Can you tell me how big the nagios
package is, and what the size is of the web-stuff ?
In case we do decide to split the package I like Hugo's proposal, however
we also need to look at what other repositories are doing and make sure we
don't create incompatibilities where they can be avoided.
--
-- dag wieers, [email protected], http://dag.wieers.com/ --
[Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/users
