04.06.2019 13:39, Thorsten Kukuk пишет:
On Tue, Jun 04, Johannes Meixner wrote:
Hello,
I do not see how the actual issue could be solved by storing config files at a different location.
It's not by storing config files at a different location, it's about separating the original configuration files from user made changes.
If application can run without configuration file, why do you need "original configuration file" in the first place? Why cannot application contain the same defaults that are provided by "original configuration file"? If application cannot run without configuration file, it should really never be enabled automatically. It must be local admin responsibility to create suitable configuration file that matches local requirement.
I think the actual issue is the conflict who has the final say in what the config files content is.
No, the actual issue is, how to merge the changes the admin made to the configuration files with the changes upstream made to the configuration files.
This cannot be solved on packaging level at all because it requires knowledge of application configuration semantic. If updated application contains new configuration items that do not conflict with existing ones, and includes suitable defaults for them, then updated application will simply work - no "original configuration file" is needed, nothing needs to be merged. If updated application invalidates previous configuration items there is no way packaging framework can automatically modify exiting configuration (file) - it must be done using application-aware helper or manually. I fail to see how splitting configuration files between different locations solves your actual issue. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org