On Sun, Sep 08, 2002 at 12:21:38PM -0700, Ray Leyva wrote: > On Sun, 8 Sep 2002 10:50:34 -0700 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Orr) wrote: > > > - Installing Webware involves calling install.py at its final location > > > > This and most of the other issues would be solved if we switch > > to distutils as we have periodically discussed. > > "python setup.py install" would install into the currently-running > > So is it worth trying to go for the distutil route in your opinion?
Yes. But it's a decision for the Webware team as a whole, and especially Geoff since he's the one who coordinates the installation work. Distutils is already used in WebwareExperimental, but the configuration can't just be dropped into Webware as-is because of other differences between the two implementations. > I would prefer to always use mod_webkit, but that's just me. I've > seen a great deal of email from many people that use, and want to > continue using mod_python, and some just want to use OneShot. The adapters seem like a minor issue. The installation utility has to support all of them, but that doesn't mean it has to get all of them in running condition without human intervention. It just has to put them somewhere where they can be copied into place and configured. It's not Webware's job to modify Apache's configuration file (to say nothing of AOLServer etc) or to install files in another package's directory. > How about using distutils to install Webware, and as part of the > install process ( ebuild / bsd-port / deb-package? ) move / copy the > default contexts to a /usr/local/WW or /usr/local/webware or > /usr/local/WebWare or /usr/local/Webware directory created by > MakeAppWorkDir. This would be the default contexts directory that > would be used, and owned by the special user created by the ( ebuild / > bsd-port / deb-package? ). It's occasionally been proposed to make AppWorkDirs mandatory and not allow Webware to be run with a default configuration in the installation location. I'm in favor of that, and it will be necessary if Webware is installed system-wide but users run their own AppServer instances. We should maintain the difference between installation files that are read-only except when installing, configuration/servlet files which are writable by the appadmin, and data files which are writable by the AppServer. > > > - Startup scripts can vary across platforms, including between > > > different Unix systems. > > Yes, but that's something that can get handled in the packaging ... > tgz / ebuild / bsd-port / deb / rpm / open-ports / etc. > > There would need to be a maintainer(s) for each type of packaging. That's up to each distribution. Debian has .deb maintainers that work with the upstream developers. Only in rare cases where there is a Debian developer on the upstream team would the upstream team release a .deb itself. Or in the cases where the upstream team wants to provide a .deb but Debian refuses to distribute it, as happened to KDE when there were questions about its copyright. In case it's not clear, the .deb maintainer would run "python setup.py install" and then build the .deb from the installed files. He may have to write package install scripts to postprocess the configuration after distutils is done. One thing we have to discuss is, is there anything that would be *bad* if we switch to distutils? -- -Mike (Iron) Orr, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (if mail problems: [EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://iron.cx/ English * Esperanto * Russkiy * Deutsch * Espan~ol ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390 _______________________________________________ Webware-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webware-discuss
