On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 06:26:35PM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Friday 21 March 2008, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> I've added another draft to the todo list:
> I doubt we'll get to it on Tuesday, but we'll get to it eventually.
If this passes, it needs a statement what to do with packages that already
use /srv in a way that conflicts with the draft. /srv/foo is typically data,
potentially lots and lots of it, so auto-migrations are practically out of
the question and manual ones are possibly nontrivial amounts of admin work.
Therefore I'd suggest letting them stay as is.
Which packages are these? Maybe they can check whether they are being
upgraded (from a package evr polluting /srv) or freshly installed. In the
latter case they should behave as every other package, e.g. not assume
anything about /srv.
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net