Electra initative rebase - is it reasonable?

RE:Elektra initiative - wikipedia has a nice, though short overview of the project.

I was referring to the fact that the TKL core (Ubuntu Server + packages) is contained in every boot image, though the base is the same for all apliances - it seems redundant - if understood correctly, of course. The Elektra Initiative is something of registry equivalent for linux - it provides a standard API - perfect for a package manager (plugin?). The backends are varied - though it can target the file system directly - I'm guessing it wouldn't be hard to integrate with existing systems (configuration files). What do you mean by "over our common core" - the core configures them? If so - it would be even easier - the tarball configs can be dumped in the appropriate section of the TKL settings, vie libelektra.

Disclaimer: I have near zero experience as a programmer - as such I don't feel qualified to put my name behind detailes feasibility evaluations.

PS: Not to be ungrateful - maybe /. spoiled me - but this comment system feels kinda klunky - somethin like Slashcode D2(3?) would be much nicer, IMHO. But that's probably just me.

Tihomir, can you elaborate your point on the ovz templates? Collaborations are always welcome. If with the core you mean the standar packages included with turnkey (webmin/console/etc) they are an integral part of a TurnkeyLinux. 

I couldn't take a look at what you call Elecktra Initiative as the site is down due to technical issues. But there are lots of appliances which install software from tarball and do configurations over our common base called TKL-Core. 

Though bloat doesn't seem to be addressed - the core is going to be contained in every template generated - and deduplicating filesystems are not yet mature - is that going to be addressed? Also, higher in this thread you mention that you build from tarballs - how is that an issue with configuration tracking in comparison with using ready packages, considering that (AFAIK) generating .deb packages is about as easy as extracting the tarball? Note the Elektra Initative allows a file system backend, so .conf file diffs can be shipped as a run once sed/awk script, for instance - IOW, there is no needto install anything extra on top of the Core. Not trying to be snarky, it's just that I can't seem to understand where the issue is.

but there is a relatively easy straightforward way to convert isos to ovz templates, have a look at this thread. 

You are correct, but OTOH, such a system would simplify integration within the VM image greatly. BTW, what's with the lack of OpenVZ images, or did I not see them? The other virtualization methods have overheads that may not always be acceptable.

but some are installed from upstream tarballs so not quite that simple. Theoretically it could still be done I suppose but to try to keep a consistent user experience & reduce the chances of issues, just making ISOs and other images available for download is probably better IMO.