Request for design critique - configuration directories

[Achim Gratz]

Eric S. Raymond writes:
> Bad argument.  The usage pattern you observe is not a law of nature, and we
> *will* gratuitously piss people off if we do as you suggest.  No: forcing
> the use of -c is a non-starter. Admins would wonder why were fscking with
> them, and they'd be right to wonder.

Well, you seem to imagine a demographic that doesn't exist where I
live.  I'm not going to argue that point any further.

> You are both absolutely correct and making an argument that turns on
> you.  There are a zillion variations on how to structure a
> config-snippet directory because nobody has yet figured out a
> sufficiently right thing to become standard practice.  If there were,
> we'd both know it and we wouldn't be having this conversation.

*shrugs* You're not the first to notice and you'll certainly not be the
last.  Here's one of the places where that leads to:

http://augeas.net/tour.html

The motivation for hierachical and distributed configurations (look no
further than systemd) is usually the need to allow separate system-wide
and per-user configurations or a desire to deliver partial
configurations via separate packages that nevertheless should be used as
a whole.  This is something NTP will never need with the exception of
the intended ntpd / refclockd split, although it could be argued that
these two configurations should be kept cleanly separate.


Regards,
Achim.
-- 
+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+

Factory and User Sound Singles for Waldorf Blofeld:
http://Synth.Stromeko.net/Downloads.html#WaldorfSounds