Future of FAI (fwd)

[Niall Young]

On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, AUSTIN MURPHY wrote:

> On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, Niall Young wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, AUSTIN MURPHY wrote:
> >
> > > I was thinking of a single "spec" file to define each class with an
> > > associated tarball containing all related scripts and files.
> >
> > Sounds great, but do we need a separate spec file?  I like the ease
> > of customising classes simply by dropping SXX scripts etc. in place and
>
> The key ideas behind my spec file were to:
> 1) allow easy recursive dependencies
> 2) easily see what a class does
> 3) reduce the number of files and directories
>
> Your directory concept solves #2 very well.  I don't think it addresses #3
> and or #1.

I don't see #3 being a real problem now, and #1 not being implemented yet
means we're not yet restricted - it can be built either way.  I'm not
suggesting any real change in how they work, only where they're located on
disk.  Combining the .var and anything else relevent into the spec file sounds
great, but I don't think you need everything in there.  A bit of both sounds
like the best solution, a uDeb or tarball down the road and then people can
more easily trade classes and improve them.

Niall Young                                    Chime Communications Pty Ltd
niall at chime.net.au                            Level 6, 263 Adelaide Terrace
Ph: 08 9213 1330 / 0408 192 797               Perth, Western Australia 6000

     "there's a lot of movement in my trousers at the moment"
                                     -- Dennis Kristofich, Sep 2002