Re: (Exposing?) config files and non-start/stop operations

[Chris Marusich <cmmarusich@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1094 bytes --]

Hi Chris!

Thanks for entertaining my questions.

Christopher Allan Webber <cwebber@dustycloud.org> writes:

>> So sure, we can run "foo-db gc" occasionally (though system
>> administrators sometimes have to run these kinds of commands by hand).
>> But what about "foo-db dumpdb"?  That's not something we just run on a
>> cronjob.  You need access to that command.  And in order for the command
>> to do the right thing, it might need access to the config file.

I'm having trouble understanding the motivation here.  Can you clarify
why it's preferable to model the action as a Shepherd action, even
though a mechanism already exists to perform the action (e.g., "foo-db
dumpdb")?

I don't know a lot about Shepherd (yet!), but it seems like you COULD
model the action as a Shepherd action.  The question is: WHY would that
be better than just performing the action via "the usual" mechanism?  If
you can provide a more concrete example which illustrates the problem
for a specific service/daemon, it might help me to understand where
you're coming from.

-- 
Chris

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 818 bytes --]