Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/libexec/httpd
To: Mindaugas R. <rmind@NetBSD.org>
From: Bill Stouder-Studenmund <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/16/2007 17:29:02
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 01:55:24AM +0300, Mindaugas R. wrote:
> Bill Stouder-Studenmund <email@example.com> wrote:
> > > - I think a better abstraction is to separate third party application=
> > > and provide packages. Putting the software into the source base requi=
> > > additional maintaining, not vice-versa;
> > I doubt that for this code. I agree that there are a number of apps for=
> > which it could well be a problem. But not this one.
> Bill, it does not matter for "this" or for "that" code, I consider it as a
> wrong direction to go. Approach is to have a dynamic, flexible system wit=
> packages and modules, not a single, huge, static base entity.
It sounds like what you want is syspkg, which isn't fully working yet.
I too would like to see it working. But it is an orthogonal question.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (NetBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----