Packaging guidelines for web applications?

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Le dimanche 07 mai 2006 à 12:03 -0700, Michael A. Peters a écrit : 
> On Sun, 2006-05-07 at 13:26 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > On 5/7/06, Michael A. Peters <mpeters at mac.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > The apache stuff in /var/www probably should be in /usr/share (except
> > > the default DocumentRoot root which IMHO should be in /srv/www/html )
> > 
> > the whole /var/www/ thing has puzzled me as well.

It's just a better /home/httpd than the previous one, and is far worse
than doing a proper FHS layout

>   I think we should
> > have a partitioned place for web applications.  Perhaps just because I
> > use a lot of web apps.  /usr/share/www/packagename/ seems very
> > reasonable to me.
> 
> That's not too unreasonable.

As long as you're not doing a simple
/home/httpd -> /var/www/ -> /usr/share/www/

The core of the problem is webapp authors choose monolithic filetree
deployments for ease-of-development and ease-of-deployment reasons while
the FHS mandates split trees for ease-of-administration reasons. And
that all the infrastructure which makes pleasing admins not too hard for
app authors is severily lacking for webapp authors.

...

> personally don't do a lot with web applications (I did in a former
> job) - but maybe we need a web app SIG to come to a consensus on how
> they should be done, and submit docs to FESCO for approval or rejection,
> so that people packaging them can have somewhere to look.

You'll probably need more some kind of bottled argument for packagers to
forward upstream.

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/attachments/20060507/ae5b6d47/attachment.sig>