[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: Apache should never be a mandatory dependency
* On 2014-05-16 at 17:13 BST, David Holland wrote:
> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 03:53:31PM +0200, Volkmar Seifert wrote:
> > > So if some kind of web server is a soft run-time dependency, then I
> > > think it makes sense to just not include it as a dependency at all.
> > Indeed. As long as not required for building, I'd strongly suggest to
> > remove all those dependencies, be that to a web-server, or to a
> > programming-language meant to somehow run in/behind a web-server (php,
> > ruby-on-rails, etc). Though with languages, build-dependencies -are-
> > more likely, so these should be included in a way that web-servers are
> > not pulled into the build unsolicited, and may even end up as a
> > dependency when installing the packages.
> I do think it's a good idea to indicate somehow that some packages
> require a web server. It isn't always obvious from DESCR; also,
> making such requirements implicit makes turnkey installs harder.
> The standard thing we do in this kind of situation is to make
> everything that requires a web server include mk/webserver.mk or
> something like that (it wouldn't probably be a bl3 file) and this
> figures out what webserver you're using based on config vars and
> depends on that.
> Not sure if that's really what we want here though.
It definitely is not something we, as a provider of binary packages,
would ever want.
Jonathan Perkin - Joyent, Inc. - www.joyent.com
Main Index |
Thread Index |