[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Health-dev] Poll: GNU Health Packets

From: Adolfina Bory Palobo
Subject: Re: [Health-dev] Poll: GNU Health Packets
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 13:59:36 +0800

Hello Dr. Braun, 

Before voting I would like to ask:

Is this question relating to SUSE packaging only?

Are these alternatives mutually exclusive - meaning whichever loses the
poll will be dropped?

Another issue is that there is always a security risk in installing
software (modules) that is "unused" because it may ## become ## used by
hackers - so a small convenience breeds a potential insecurity. We all
agree that in the health domain, security must be an important concern,
possibly an overriding concern. I believe the convenience is not worth
it. (So you already know which way I will vote :-)

On Wed, 18 Dec 2019 20:13:14 +0100
"Dr. Axel Braun" <address@hidden> wrote:

> Dear GNU Health Users,
> having spoken to a couple of people during HealthCon, a question came
> into my mind: How shall we build packages in the future?
> In openSUSE we have all modules in one package:
> zypper install gnuhealth
> installs the server and all GNU Health modules. No doubt, this is
> very convenient. You can still activate only those modules that you
> really need, and the rest just uses some disk space (and maybe some
> milliseconds processing time during startup).
> An alternative would be to have one packet per module - this is
> basically how GNU Health is presented on Pypi, and how it was done
> for Debian. It allows you to only install what you really need and do
> some fine-tuning of your installation (of course you can add modules
> later!)
> So, each option has pros and cons.
> Let me know your opinion and vote here:
> Thanks!
> Axel

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]