Re: Vocabulary to describe software installation

hi sarven,

thanks for links and feedback!

your considerations are absolutely valid. i was thinking about the sudo
thing also... probably it would be a good idea "to do it like the do on the
rpm/deb channel" (instead of sudo run everything as root and chown
afterwards).
regarding the exit codes (and reaction to them) it also would be good to
not only skip a step if something goes wrong but also to undo previous
steps..
(i have nuked my notebook not only once ;-) )... i'll be doing a small
python script for experiments..

wouldn't this be a nice working group: linked package management?

wkr j

| Jürgen Jakobitsch,
| Software Developer
| Semantic Web Company GmbH
| Mariahilfer Straße 70 / Neubaugasse 1, Top 8
| A - 1070 Wien, Austria
| Mob +43 676 62 12 710 | Fax +43.1.402 12 35 - 22

COMPANY INFORMATION
| web       : http://www.semantic-web.at/
| foaf      : http://company.semantic-web.at/person/juergen_jakobitsch
PERSONAL INFORMATION
| web       : http://www.turnguard.com
| foaf      : http://www.turnguard.com/turnguard
| g+        : https://plus.google.com/111233759991616358206/posts
| skype     : jakobitsch-punkt
| xmlns:tg  = "http://www.turnguard.com/turnguard#"

2015-05-04 8:44 GMT+02:00 Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca>:

> On 2015-05-04 01:38, Jürgen Jakobitsch wrote:
>
>> first experiment in action...
>>
>> apache mesos 0.22.0 installation instruction :
>>
>> sparql : http://goo.gl/6euq1I
>> turtle:
>>
>> http://software.turnguard.com/apache_mesos/0/22/0/installation/opensuse/13/2.ttl
>>
>>
>> btw: do we have a datatype for bash/shell/python/whatever scripts (i.e.:
>> <> shell:command "ls"^^xsd:shellcom)?
>>
>> i'm somehow tempted to => run <=  the sparql results...
>>
>> wkr j
>>
> Fantastic!
>
> Some (possibly trivial) feedback/considerations:
>
> * Exclude "sudo" from the actions.
> * Use absolute paths instead of relative.
> * Consider integrating decisions on success/failure of steps, e.g., should
> step 11 run if step 10 is a failure?
>
> re: what I've mentioned about OPMW/P-PLan/PROV-O in previous email, if the
> steps themselves focus only on describing what they are about, and exclude
> when they should be executed, they can be reused in other context without
> having to redefine the step. From that point, all that's necessary is
> actually coming up with a new workflow plan simply referring to steps.
>
> -Sarven
> http://csarven.ca/#i
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>