[gentoo-dev] Re: Interaction in ebuilds - bad idea?

[Ryan Phillips]

* Stuart Herbert <stuart@g.o> [2004-04-29 14:30]:
> On Thursday 29 April 2004 22:04, Ajai Khattri wrote:
>
> Here's the points I want to tackle include:
>
> * standard way for ebuilds to interact with database servers locally
> * support for ebuilds to work with a remote database server
> * standard way for ebuilds to install new databases
>   - naming schemes for databases
>   - naming schemes for users that apps use
> * a standard way to automate upgrading databases when we upgrade apps
>   - auto-generation of SQL upgrade scripts
>     (we can't rely on UPSTREAM to provide them)
> * a standard way to automate removing databases when we remove apps
>   - what do we remove
>   - when do we remove it
> * hooks so that we can add new databases to backup schemes automatically
>   - oh the fun ;-)
>
> I think we need to put a design down as a GLEP, as introducing the tool or
> tools to do all of this will impact users and devs alike.
>
> Thoughts, comments?  Anyone interested in helping out on this?
>
> Best regards,
> Stu

I think this is a really good idea.  The ebuild config mechanism is
not all that smart.  Since, there is work on an installer there should
be some mechanism for the installer to query an "install specification
file" per package.  Something like an installshield script, but it
needs to export configuration items (ie: parameters, possible values,
etc).  The interface should be generic enough so that any type of
configuration utility (GUI, console, or non-interactive) can run the
configuration.

Depending on the time frame... I may be able to help out on this.
Graduation from college is at the end of this year (I hope :).

-Ryan