1 |
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 6:49 AM, Sebastian Pipping <sping@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> Questions: |
3 |
> |
4 |
> - What does reviving mean in detail? |
5 |
> A re-write? A somewhat compatible re-write? |
6 |
|
7 |
I am not necessarily interested in a complete re-write unless its |
8 |
really warranted due to support for new features. First things first, |
9 |
webapp-config needs to have the open bugs addressed and current |
10 |
functionality should be supported. |
11 |
|
12 |
> Getting back to maintaining the current code? |
13 |
|
14 |
There is some good code in there, so I think at minimum some of that |
15 |
will be maintained moving forward. Regardless, the current codebase |
16 |
should be audited, bugs fixed, and a new design spec incorporating the |
17 |
new features desired needs to be written in collaboration with various |
18 |
stake holders. |
19 |
|
20 |
|
21 |
> Why did you choose how you did? |
22 |
|
23 |
I do not understand this sentence, but will try to explain the choices |
24 |
a bit. Having used webapp-config for 7 years or so, I had grown fond |
25 |
of it for managing things like drupal (back in the day) and for |
26 |
handling static media for my company projects. As time progressed, it |
27 |
seemed reasonable to extend the functionality of w-c to do fancier |
28 |
things like change tracking or byte-compiling python modules outside |
29 |
of site-packages for multi-instance and potentially multi-versioned |
30 |
deployments of the various pythonic webapps I manage. It seems |
31 |
reasonable to roll this sort of functionality into the existing tool. |
32 |
I am not intending to make this something specific to python webapps, |
33 |
just to be clear, but include tools to handle webapps written in |
34 |
ruby/rails, perl, etc. |
35 |
|
36 |
Additionally, Gentoo's infra team uses w-c for a few things and its a |
37 |
nice tool that mostly integrates well into cfengine (afaik). Whatever |
38 |
the case with automation, it does make management tasks easier |
39 |
(perhaps IMO). |
40 |
|
41 |
Further, there are substantial applications, like Moodle, that would |
42 |
benefit from a more robust deployment toolkit within Gentoo. |
43 |
|
44 |
So, in general, from both a distribution and a professional |
45 |
perspective its quite clear (at least to me), that this tool has an |
46 |
important role in Gentoo and therefore needs to be revived. |
47 |
|
48 |
> |
49 |
> - Have you spoken to Andreas Nüsslein who worked on a |
50 |
> re-write in context of an earlier GSoC? |
51 |
|
52 |
I have not. I was unaware of this project until it was mentioned in |
53 |
replies to this thread. I have started reading the code. Perhaps there |
54 |
are some elements of Andreas' code we can incorporate into the w-c |
55 |
codebase. I need to dig into the code far more than my cursory glance. |
56 |
|
57 |
> |
58 |
> Best, |
59 |
> |
60 |
> |
61 |
> |
62 |
> |
63 |
> Sebastian |
64 |
> |
65 |
> |
66 |
|
67 |
Good questions Sebastian, thanks. |
68 |
|
69 |
Matthew W. Summers |
70 |
Gentoo Foundation Inc. |