2008/8/8 Per Jessen :

there appears to be only 2 (two!) community members listed on http://en.opensuse.org/YaST/Team - one of which is yourself.

True there's only 2 people listed there not employed by Novell, but the development was only opened up fully about a year ago (although it had been free software for longer). Also there are a lot more contributors listed than on that page, both in the community and working for other companies.

Thanks for your reply, but I think you've neglected to answer the questions I posed:

I suggested you contact the yast-devel mailing list for questions specific to the yast development process as people there will no doubt be able to give you better answers. I can only provide opinions based on my experience, but if you want I will try to answer.

Is this (openSUSE/YaST ) true open source,

I'm not sure what you mean by this. YaST is open source and free software (It is GPLed) It is also developed in the open in a public code repository.

or is it a Novell product management decision? Who is the project lead on YaST? How does one submit patches? Who decides what is accepted and what is rejected?

It is also open to contribution from anyone, whether or not they work for Novell (I believe everyone on the yast team list has commit access). The first place to send patches would be the yast-devel list, or attach to the appropriate bug in bugzilla. Decisions about what is accepted or rejected would presumably be made by either the maintainer of what you are submitting a patch to or a team leader. As for what is shipped with and supported in the official distribution, that is up to Novell as they are the ones providing the support. Nevertheless, I would be surprised if something that there is community demand for, and community resource to maintain would be excluded. -- Benjamin Weber --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Hi Andreas, On a similar note I would like to complain, that today there is not mechanism for introducing user's packages from Build Service into Factory. I spoken with few people on build service mailing list, but we came to no conclusion. I think that the best would be to make a new Build Service project called: "Factory-Candidates", which is made out of packages that already stable and already in the build service but wanna be contributed into "Factory". It may function similarly to Mandriva's "contrib", except for better quality control. And after some tests, those packages should become part of factory. Reason: openSUSE lacks in the packages arena - both copmpared to Mandriva and Debian which have much more packages and useful utilities, and extensions for applications, that are part of distro. I'm willing to contribute. Both at testing/maintaining/building RPMs. -- -Alexey Eromenko "Technologov" --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Sat, Aug 9, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Andreas Jaeger wrote:

"Alexey Eremenko" writes:

...

Hi Andreas,

On a similar note I would like to complain, that today there is not mechanism for introducing user's packages from Build Service into Factory.

Yes, this is something which needs some more thinking and discussions. We have so far for Factory the following requirements: * Novell co-maintainership * Possibility to deliver security updates during live time of product * strict legal review

IMO we need some other way, perhaps some "contrib" where some of these do not need to apply - and also some rules on which to add to "factory",

At the very least the OBS needs to be expanded. Right now in Yast "Community repositories" very few of the available repositories are even listed. One needs to manually search the OBS and add the repositories they are interested in. If at the very least the "Community repositories" list were kept as-is but added a new repository that consists of the packages that one must manually search for this might solve some of those concerns and make the software more available to openSUSE users (sort of like the "universe" and "multiverse" repos for a popular Debian-based distribution) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Sat, Aug 9, 2008 at 11:43 AM, Alexey Eremenko wrote:

Yes, "Universe" and "Multiverse" are great concept.

But online search is not enough, because I need to access those repositories offline, they must be downloadble.

Currently openSUSE build service 100's of repositories are not download-friendly.

I am talking about offline search (adding the repository locally) You can go to Yast2 -> Software -> Community Repositories (or access a similar menu through Yast2 -> Software -> Software management) The great majority of the OBS repositories are not even listed there! --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Cristian Rodríguez wrote:

Alexey Eremenko escribió:

...

Yes, "Universe" and "Multiverse" are great concept.

Not really.

Actually openSUSE does not need multiverse because the already distribute non-Free software, and the "encumbered" package (ie patent liabilities) can't be.

...

But online search is not enough, because I need to access those repositories offline, they must be downloadble.

Hello ? welcome to the 21 century.

I have to disagree on this statement. In the 21st century there are still countries where private monopolies still don't deploy the needed infrastructure. For example, here, in Canada, less then 30 km away from the National Capital, there are areas where broadband internet access does not exist and where dial-up access isn't very speedy either. Yes, being off-line still occur in the 21st century, and denying this fact is not helpful. Hub --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Am Dienstag 12 August 2008 schrieb Peter Poeml:

On Sat, Aug 09, 2008 at 03:22:24PM -0400, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:

...

Alexey Eremenko escribió:

...

But online search is not enough, because I need to access those repositories offline, they must be downloadble.

Hello ? welcome to the 21 century.

Could you be a little less harsh please?

If you consider the issue more carefully, you'll see that there are lots of users with less-than-optimal internet connectivity. There are people that have to pay for bandwidth. It may not be apparent to you, but even downloading a >100 MB openoffice package can be a weeks-long adventure in places/countries different than yours.

And think of those users that we *could* have if we could improve the usability of our products in those conditions. Well, bandwidth doesn't seem to be Alexey's problem if he wants to download all repos :)

And I don't think we should optimize our setup to the conditions you mention. If tweaks are possible ot improve it, fine. But optimizing for a small fraction of our users (and that's what Cristian's harsh words really mean :) sounds plain wrong. Greetings, Stephan -- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

I want to stay-internet independent. Only having everything offline allow me to.

Your problem, not ours. Stop with this annoying bribery you do of saying your single little tiny unique crazy nuts problem is the problem if everyone and that it should be priority maximum. You are not fooling anyone here. Marcio Ferreira --- Druid --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 14:09:10 +0300 "Alexey Eremenko" wrote:

Druid: We never agree with you on anything, so I won';t even try this time. We are opposites - in all question.

OK - start of the topic was: "If community contribued" - so I want to contribute, - to Factory - but there is not way of doing so.

Most Linux distros have a way to contribute - something needs to be done for openSUSE as well.

Alexey, How do you want to contribute? If you can code or package you can use the Build Service to submit patches/improvements to packages in factory. One of the best ways to contribute to Factory is to test it till it bleeds and then provide really good in-depth bug reports (with a fix would be even better ;-) ). If you are knowledgeable in the ways of Linux and the way the geeko does things then you can help others on IRC and the forums. If you have a marketing flair you can join in with the openSUSE Marketing Team. You could translate packages/documentation/wiki etc. openSUSE has a wide range of ways for people to contribute, it has always had many ways to contribute, it is expanding them even further on a fairly regular basis. Decide on how you want to contribute and then do it. If that medium doesn't exist yet then request it. Requesting that it be possible to contribute to factory is pointless as many ways already exist. Happy contributions. Andy -- Andrew Wafaa, openSUSE Member: GNOME & Marketing Teams. http://opensuse.org/GNOME | http://en.opensuse.org/Marketing_Team openSUSE: Get It, Discover It, Create It at http://www.opensuse.org awafaa@opensuse.org http://www.wafaa.eu | http://www.forcev.net --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 15:54:00 +0300 "Alexey Eremenko" wrote:

I BETA-test openSUSE distro since 10.0, wrote openSUSE documentation (Lessons for Lizard), and built few RPMs. Additionally I donate $ each month to different OSS projects and beta-test different OSS applications.

Now I'm thinking of way to build _big_ repository, which will contain lots of packages that openSUSE Factory lacks.

Current model of third-party packages for openSUSE is broken in my opinion. There are lots of packages across hundreds of Build Service projects, which is hard to download & navigate. It is bad idea for deployment - it is only good for experimentation/development.

I have few possible ideas here: 1. Convince community to integrate stable third-party packages into openSUSE Factory 2. Convince community to make a big, united third-party repository 3. Build third-party repo myself in openSUSE build service 4. Build third-party repo myself in private server

I really believe that #1 is best idea, but due to opposition I don't know. Perhaps I will need to evaluate other options.

By this I take it you mean something similar to Ubuntu's Universe repo or whatever it is? IMHO I'm not a great fan of the idea. Why? Well sometimes I may just want one package and having the multitude of packages that are contained within most likely will lead to conflicts. I already encounter such issues with a few packages from the Packman repos. Thankfully they are few and far between.

Back to the question:

...

How do you want to contribute? I want to test & maintain third-part packages, that go into openSUSE Factory.

NOTE: I can maintain packages stability wise, but not security wise. (I'm not security expert) So for security-related updates, we will need to figure out how is it possible to provide this for third-party/community packages.

A good way of doing this is either through the BuildService or indeed joining the Packman team. There are already multiple Community repos available in the BS, GNOME/KDE/XFCE/Mono. They do a very good job of hosting the 3rd party apps no in the main distro. There are very strict requirements on a package making it into the distro, once in a release there is a version freeze maintainability for the lifespan of the distro etc. Unless you can fulfil *ALL* the criteria then you won't get anything in. If openSUSE were to relax on those requirements then it would lead to a shoddy distro and open the door to a lot of complaints (rightly so). The community repos are not so strict on the requirements. I would recommend you try and help out with one or more of these repos, they are available by default in the Community Repository list from YaST. So any contribution you make will be made available almost out of the box ;-) Regards, Andy -- Andrew Wafaa, openSUSE Member: GNOME & Marketing Teams. http://opensuse.org/GNOME | http://en.opensuse.org/Marketing_Team openSUSE: Get It, Discover It, Create It at http://www.opensuse.org awafaa@opensuse.org http://www.wafaa.eu | http://www.forcev.net --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

I support #2, provided some rules are applied, for example:

- The packages should be testable during openSUSE development period - No new packages after openSUSE feature freeze - The repo is frozen at openSUSE release time

+1 Yep, That sounds good !

- Everything is built against the openSUSE base or against packages in the new repo...

-- -Alexey Eromenko "Technologov" --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 9:37 PM, Stephan Kulow wrote:

Am Dienstag 12 August 2008 schrieb Alexey Eremenko:

...

...

I support #2, provided some rules are applied, for example:

- The packages should be testable during openSUSE development period - No new packages after openSUSE feature freeze - The repo is frozen at openSUSE release time

+1 Yep, That sounds good !

OK guys, that sounds like a good plan. First I would like to see two wiki pages: - one with the rules and who is going to coordinate the effort - a list of packages from what repo would be the initial set

If we get the 1000, we can start :)

I volunteer. -- -Alexey Eromenko "Technologov" --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

- No duplicated packages ( packages that already exist on openSUSE release shouldnt be included in this repo) A wrote a wiki page a post earlier, maybe you can take a look on ot.

- We should estabilish a package review comitee. Yes. But main criteria should be stability.

- We need some kind of security policy, I guess the security team can provide feedback on this matter. I hope Novell guys will support community efforts here.

- We shouldnt forget legal stuff. We haven't discussed it yet, but other ditros seems to have 2 repositories like Ubuntu's Universe and Multiverse to cover needs of all people.

-- -Alexey Eromenko "Technologov" --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Am Mittwoch 13 August 2008 schrieb Alexey Eremenko:

...

...

- We shouldnt forget legal stuff.

We haven't discussed it yet, but other ditros seems to have 2 repositories like Ubuntu's Universe and Multiverse to cover needs of all people.

BTW We already have the not-so-legal repo (pacman), so this one could be more strict.

We should not be more relaxed then what the build service allows anyway. And with that everything should be covered. Greetings, Stephan -- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Alexey Eremenko escribió:

...

- No duplicated packages ( packages that already exist on openSUSE release shouldnt be included in this repo) A wrote a wiki page a post earlier, maybe you can take a look on ot.

...

- We should estabilish a package review comitee. Yes. But main criteria should be stability.

package review is a different thing, but yes, we need that and an small QA group.

We haven't discussed it yet, but other ditros seems to have 2 repositories like Ubuntu's Universe and Multiverse to cover needs of all people.

This repository should have no different legal policy, in fact it actually can't. -- "A computer is like an Old Testament god, with a lot of rules and no mercy. " Cristian Rodríguez R. Platform/OpenSUSE - Core Services SUSE LINUX Products GmbH Research & Development http://www.opensuse.org/

"Contrib" is a good name and is modelled after Mandriva's "contrib", which has similar goal.

As discussed yesterday in the project meeting, let's add: - No duplication of packages from factory,

Agreed. (with few exceptions, such as GCCv3 - which is needed by some packages, but can be seen as duplication of GCC4, which is in Factory) It should be: - No duplication of packages from factory, unless it has a justified reason (such as development dependency) -- -Alexey Eromenko "Technologov" --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Alexey Eremenko escribió:

Agreed. (with few exceptions, such as GCCv3 - which is needed by some packages, but can be seen as duplication of GCC4, which is in Factory)

No, packages should be built with the distro compiler, and no, whatever requires GCC 3 needs to be either excluded or fixed. This exception is a "no-no" IMHO. -- "A computer is like an Old Testament god, with a lot of rules and no mercy. " Cristian Rodríguez R. Platform/OpenSUSE - Core Services SUSE LINUX Products GmbH Research & Development http://www.opensuse.org/

It was discussed a little bit in the project irc meeting yesterday, and it seems most prefer the working title "contrib" for the project.

Can I see the IRC meeting history ? (archive link plz) -- -Alexey Eromenko "Technologov" --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Torsdag 14 august 2008 11:35:47 skrev Alexey Eremenko:

...

It was discussed a little bit in the project irc meeting yesterday, and it seems most prefer the working title "contrib" for the project.

Can I see the IRC meeting history ? (archive link plz)

http://en.opensuse.org/Meetings/Project_Meeting_2008-08-13/transcript --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Wasn't the original plan to package 'useful utilities' or something among these lines? Now adding this old compiler just to be able to compile a package written in historic C++ (didn't we talk about maintainability / upstream support?), this old library because another project didn't catch up with api changes (likewise), this new library because this cool app unfortunately requires features only found in svn HEAD of said library - where does this stop? I'm affraid that without a hard rule of not duplicating packages from the distro, the new repository won't be much different from existing repos (and I'm not sure I would still want to participate in that).

Hmmm... So you believe this is absolutely evil ? What other people are thinking on this topic ? -- -Alexey Eromenko "Technologov" --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Alexey Eremenko wrote:

...

Wasn't the original plan to package 'useful utilities' or something among these lines? Now adding this old compiler just to be able to compile a package written in historic C++ (didn't we talk about maintainability / upstream support?), this old library because another project didn't catch up with api changes (likewise), this new library because this cool app unfortunately requires features only found in svn HEAD of said library - where does this stop? I'm affraid that without a hard rule of not duplicating packages from the distro, the new repository won't be much different from existing repos (and I'm not sure I would still want to participate in that).

Hmmm... So you believe this is absolutely evil ?

Not 'absolutely evil' but it can cause trouble (trust me - e.g. we had enough fun in devel:laguages:python with python-curl requiring newer curl and newer curl replacing old curl required by rest of the system on older distros). I was hoping for a repository without these problems, which could be safely added as installation source without having to disable all the time. IMO, in 90% of the cases where some package needs a newer/older version, someone just needs to sit down and port the package to the distro. The remaining 10% could then be handled case by case. And yes, so far I'm interested and I listed myself on your draft page :) Michal --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Am Donnerstag 14 August 2008 schrieb Druid:

...

Wasn't the original plan to package 'useful utilities' or something among these lines? Now adding this old compiler just to be able to compile a package written in historic C++ (didn't we talk about maintainability / upstream support?),

No, as usual, its more like Alexey wanting just because he wants for his own sake and telling everyone that the community needs it, bla bla bla.

The package list is completely absurd (putty?????) and I believe that by no means it reflects any "general need"

But congratulations, Alexey, you finally managed to get everyone working selfishly for you and you can have the excuse that its for the great community.

Seems like a great waste of time this thing. Honestly.

Hi Marcio, You're free to ignore the effort. But I would welcome if you would limit your bitching about other people. Greetings, Stephan -- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

...

Hi Marcio,

You're free to ignore the effort. But I would welcome if you would limit your bitching about other people.

Great Still sounds like a great waste of time. Hopefully putty.exe in the repo will solve the problems Marcio --- Druid --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

"Alexey Eremenko" writes:

"Contrib" is a good name and is modelled after Mandriva's "contrib", which has similar goal.

...

As discussed yesterday in the project meeting, let's add: - No duplication of packages from factory,

Agreed. (with few exceptions, such as GCCv3 - which is needed by some packages, but can be seen as duplication of GCC4, which is in Factory)

GCCv3 should really not be needed anymore.

It should be: - No duplication of packages from factory, unless it has a justified reason (such as development dependency)

Duplication with a different name would be ok but not with the same name! I do not want name clashes Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, Director Platform / openSUSE, aj@suse.de SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126

Also you noted "backports". Speaking of "backports" - we have not decided yet the policy for this type of things.

Yes, backports is great, its what debian does right? And the we will tell people "oh, use $very_old_suse_in_here and just use the backports of $random_program, because its exactly the same as security updates, its great, its stable, very tested, it will be the best". Thats the lies debian people likes to tell. That backports are fantastic, backprots are the best thing in the world. They just dont tell when backports break everything and you are screwed, specially when you are using a backport in aproduction, which is what inexperient sysadmins that believes in the debian falacy will do. Backports are not tested, they are just built, and hopefuly it compiles. Its not the same thing as a system with security patches. Backports are unmaintained, untested, they work by pure luck. Marcio --- Druid --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

...

Backports are not tested, they are just built, and hopefuly it compiles. Its not the same thing as a system with security patches. Backports are unmaintained, untested, they work by pure luck.

Yes, I have the same impression, and if this "contrib" repo, is going to become a "backports" repo, Im out ;P

Well, I also think that there are more disadvantages than advantages in doing backports. (it reduces concentration) -- -Alexey Eromenko "Technologov" --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Who mentioned what? I'm losing context here :-).

Anyway, backports are best provided by separate projects (like Apache, network:ldap, GNOME:STABLE ...), so that users can decide which packages to upgrade. I think this is a case where multiple small repositories have their justification.

I just thought if the new project should be just an extension of Factory or also have "backports" for older distros. But since we cannot _really_ test the "backports", I think "contrib" will focus of being an extension for "Factory". The advantages (of being just Factory extension) is it will give us more focus & perhaps more stability. Disadvantages - is that users of current distro's will be unable to help us BETA-test. This means that regular users will join BETA testing of "contrib" just in 11.1, but it is OK, because we won't likely to have too many packages by then. Any opinions ? -- -Alexey Eromenko "Technologov" --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

"Alexey Eremenko" writes:

Andreas Jaeger wrote:

...

Duplication with a different name would be ok but not with the same name! I do not want name clashes

Michal Marek: Ok, Andreas also thinks that exceptions to duplications can take place, provided they are non-intrusive and justified, like in my example.

I don't think they should occur in general and only be a rare and justified exception - and I agree with coolo, there should not be any file conflicts at all! gcc3 is nothing I would say makes sense to add... Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, Director Platform / openSUSE, aj@suse.de SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126

On Thu, 14 Aug 2008, Alexey Eremenko wrote:

Agreed. (with few exceptions, such as GCCv3 - which is needed by some packages, but can be seen as duplication of GCC4, which is in Factory)

Take care! Using a number of older versions of GCC -- leads to pain in the longer term. Carrying the previous release to what FACTORY has at any point in time shouldn't be much of an issue, but based on my experience with a larger set of ports^Wpackages I advise against overdoing this. Gerald -- Dr. Gerald Pfeifer E gp@novell.com SUSE Linux Products GmbH Director Inbound Product Mgmt T +49(911)74053-0 HRB 16746 (AG Nuremberg) openSUSE/SUSE Linux Enterprise F +49(911)74053-483 GF: Markus Rex --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Alexey Eremenko napsal(a):

Now I'm thinking of way to build _big_ repository, which will contain lots of packages that openSUSE Factory lacks. ... I have few possible ideas here: 1. Convince community to integrate stable third-party packages into openSUSE Factory 2. Convince community to make a big, united third-party repository 3. Build third-party repo myself in openSUSE build service 4. Build third-party repo myself in private server

I really believe that #1 is best idea, but due to opposition I don't know. Perhaps I will need to evaluate other options.

What about going for #2 initially and gradually integrating packages matching certain criteria (popularity, maintainability, etc) into Factory? Michal --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Alexey Eremenko wrote:

Michal Marek wrote:

...

Alexey Eremenko napsal(a):

...

Now I'm thinking of way to build _big_ repository, which will contain lots of packages that openSUSE Factory lacks. ... I have few possible ideas here: 1. Convince community to integrate stable third-party packages into openSUSE Factory 2. Convince community to make a big, united third-party repository 3. Build third-party repo myself in openSUSE build service 4. Build third-party repo myself in private server

I really believe that #1 is best idea, but due to opposition I don't know. Perhaps I will need to evaluate other options.

...

What about going for #2 initially and gradually integrating packages matching certain criteria (popularity, maintainability, etc) into Factory?

I agree with #2, but this means we will need to setup "factory-candidate-packages" repository/Build service project.

I need permission, so this will allow me to start moving packages into there.

Ask for permission on the buildservice list (again :)). Michal --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Please look here: http://en.opensuse.org/User:FenixNBK -- -Alexey Eromenko "Technologov" --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Alexey,

if you want somebody to add or sort, move that to some other page. I don't feel comfortable to make exemptions from the rule not to touch user page.

I agree. OK, Where do you believe it should sit ? -- -Alexey Eromenko "Technologov" --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Andrew Wafaa wrote:

How do you want to contribute? If you can code or package you can use the Build Service to submit patches/improvements to packages in factory. One of the best ways to contribute to Factory is to test it till it bleeds and then provide really good in-depth bug reports (with a fix would be even better ;-) ). If you are knowledgeable in the ways of Linux and the way the geeko does things then you can help others on IRC and the forums. If you have a marketing flair you can join in with the openSUSE Marketing Team. You could translate packages/documentation/wiki etc.

openSUSE has a wide range of ways for people to contribute, it has always had many ways to contribute, it is expanding them even further on a fairly regular basis.

Decide on how you want to contribute and then do it. If that medium doesn't exist yet then request it. Requesting that it be possible to contribute to factory is pointless as many ways already exist.

Is there a good "Get Involved" (or similar) page that lists all this with links to the items and which is well-linked itself? Your post sounds like a very good starter for that! Robert Kaiser --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Alexey Eremenko wrote:

On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 1:33 PM, Stephan Kulow wrote:

...

Am Dienstag 12 August 2008 schrieb Peter Poeml:

...

On Sat, Aug 09, 2008 at 03:22:24PM -0400, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:

...

Alexey Eremenko escribió:

...

But online search is not enough, because I need to access those repositories offline, they must be downloadble. Hello ? welcome to the 21 century. Could you be a little less harsh please?

If you consider the issue more carefully, you'll see that there are lots of users with less-than-optimal internet connectivity. There are people that have to pay for bandwidth. It may not be apparent to you, but even downloading a>100 MB openoffice package can be a weeks-long adventure in places/countries different than yours.

And think of those users that we *could* have if we could improve the usability of our products in those conditions. Well, bandwidth doesn't seem to be Alexey's problem if he wants to download all repos :)

And I don't think we should optimize our setup to the conditions you mention. If tweaks are possible ot improve it, fine. But optimizing for a small fraction of our users (and that's what Cristian's harsh words really mean :) sounds plain wrong.

I want to stay-internet independent. Only having everything offline allow me to.

Case in point, the recent Gmail outage. Besides, too many single points of failure in between and if you are unlucky, total disruption at times. Regards Sid. -- Sid Boyce ... Hamradio License G3VBV, Licensed Private Pilot Emeritus IBM/Amdahl Mainframes and Sun/Fujitsu Servers Tech Support Specialist, Cricket Coach Microsoft Windows Free Zone - Linux used for all Computing Tasks --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 12:33:43PM +0200, Stephan Kulow wrote:

Am Dienstag 12 August 2008 schrieb Peter Poeml:

...

On Sat, Aug 09, 2008 at 03:22:24PM -0400, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:

...

Alexey Eremenko escribió:

...

But online search is not enough, because I need to access those repositories offline, they must be downloadble.

Hello ? welcome to the 21 century.

Could you be a little less harsh please?

If you consider the issue more carefully, you'll see that there are lots of users with less-than-optimal internet connectivity. There are people that have to pay for bandwidth. It may not be apparent to you, but even downloading a >100 MB openoffice package can be a weeks-long adventure in places/countries different than yours.

Well, bandwidth doesn't seem to be Alexey's problem if he wants to download all repos :)

I don't know details. I don't know if he intends to do that. Usually, if people request things like that, they either * cannot download huge amounts * cannot download reliably * need to save bandwidth

And I don't think we should optimize our setup to the conditions you mention.

Yes, we *should* keep those people in mind. And optimize for them. No, we should not optimize *only* for them. That's not what I meant to imply (if you understood my post that way)

If tweaks are possible ot improve it, fine. But optimizing for a small fraction of our users (and that's what Cristian's harsh words really mean :) sounds plain wrong.

I don't know.

Greetings, Stephan

Peter -- "WARNING: This bug is visible to non-employees. Please be respectful!" SUSE LINUX Products GmbH Research & Development

"Andrew Joakimsen" writes:

At the very least the OBS needs to be expanded. Right now in Yast "Community repositories" very few of the available repositories are even listed. One needs to manually search the OBS and add the

Only those that some were considered stable and usefull, if more should be added, let's discuss specific ones.

repositories they are interested in. If at the very least the "Community repositories" list were kept as-is but added a new repository that consists of the packages that one must manually search

Which ones do you have in mind?

for this might solve some of those concerns and make the software more available to openSUSE users (sort of like the "universe" and "multiverse" repos for a popular Debian-based distribution)

Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, Director Platform / openSUSE, aj@suse.de SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126

Hi Zonker !

This should probably be on the agenda on the next -project meeting. We definitely need some way to move popular packages into Factory and a repository for contributed packages.

Definitely.

Maybe even a project to try to match or exceed the packages in Debian's repositories...

Dreamer, huh ? Debian has 18000 packages vs. 6000 in SUSE ! Anyway, I share this objective :) -- -Alexey Eromenko "Technologov" --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Hi,

I didn't say it would be *easy* or *fast* but I think it should be an objective -- at least an objective to work towards having more packages in our repositories.

I am sorry, but I really think the quality of the existing packages should be improved. eclipse for example is pretty popular but still seems unmaintained although it is in the distribution. The problems are fixed upstream and there are bugreports about them. And I have been complaining here. :-( So maybe it is not just the quantity but the quality which should be high. https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=293439 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=353522 http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse/2007-09/msg00902.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-factory/2008-05/msg00580.html ... Felix Möller --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Saturday 09 August 2008 11:18:31 am Alexey Eremenko wrote:

We need both.

And we need more people that can handle that, so we need marketing to attract more people, that will ask for more people, ... We probably need place that will prioritize resources: people and machines time. To prioritize resources we have to know them, but we don't have human resources department, nor list of machines and capabilities. For human part we have user directory, but not much listed in it. To develop that we would need more people ... -- Regards, Rajko http://en.opensuse.org/Portal needs helpful hands. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Sat, Aug 9, 2008 at 12:15 PM, Felix Möller wrote:

Hi,

...

I didn't say it would be *easy* or *fast* but I think it should be an objective -- at least an objective to work towards having more packages in our repositories.

I am sorry, but I really think the quality of the existing packages should be improved.

Why are you sorry about that? :-)

eclipse for example is pretty popular but still seems unmaintained although it is in the distribution. The problems are fixed upstream and there are bugreports about them. And I have been complaining here. :-(

So maybe it is not just the quantity but the quality which should be high.

Maybe? I'd say definitely. They are not, however, mutually exclusive. Suggesting that we include more packages in no way implied that quality is not also a goal. Best, Zonker -- Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier openSUSE Community Manager jzb@zonker.net http://zonker.opensuse.org/ http://www.dissociatedpress.net/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Felix Möller writes:

Hi,

...

I didn't say it would be *easy* or *fast* but I think it should be an objective -- at least an objective to work towards having more packages in our repositories.

I am sorry, but I really think the quality of the existing packages should be improved.

eclipse for example is pretty popular but still seems unmaintained although it is in the distribution. The problems are fixed upstream and there are bugreports about them. And I have been complaining here. :-(

You're invited to build in the openSUSE Build Service your own eclipse package with those fixes in it and then submit your package to factory.

So maybe it is not just the quantity but the quality which should be high.

Which one do you prefer? I prefer quality with a "reasonable" quantity, Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, Director Platform / openSUSE, aj@suse.de SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126

I agree with having more in our repositories but I don't agree that everything has to be in factory. I would like to have definition for factory first so that we do not need a Novell maintainer for factory packages,

Well, then it is possible to achieve something like "Fedora Core"=Factory (i.e. maintained by Novell), and "Fedora Extras" - central openSUSE repository maintained by community. Made of third-party packages, that are tested for stability. -- -Alexey Eromenko "Technologov" --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Alexey Eremenko escribió:

Dreamer, huh ? Debian has 18000 packages vs. 6000 in SUSE !

ohh joy, 18000 buggy packages instead of a selected few thousands working. -- "A computer is like an Old Testament god, with a lot of rules and no mercy. " Cristian Rodríguez R. Platform/OpenSUSE - Core Services SUSE LINUX Products GmbH Research & Development http://www.opensuse.org/

On Sat, Aug 9, 2008 at 9:21 PM, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:

Alexey Eremenko escribió:

...

openSUSE lacks in the packages arena -

lacks In WHAT ? specifically ?

Do you want me to get started on that ? Very long-list - 12000 packages that Debian has :)

ohh joy, 18000 buggy packages instead of a selected few thousands working.

If we apply some quality control, we will only introduce the working packages :) And I can do the QA. So we have a volunteer :) Future packages: (utilities) -banner -twin -ipcalc (provided by some other, python version) -VDE Virtual Distributed Ethernet -sc - ncurses based spreadsheet -KDE plugin: ISO Mount -most (similar to "more" page viewer) -tor (TOR union network) (GUI applications) -iperf + iperfQt (?) -LPhoto from Linspire -Aptana (?) -scite (others) -FireFox: Extensions/Add-ons convert to RPM packages (?) -Wallpapers (from SUSE Linux 10.0, kde-look, ...) -compat-gcc-34 (like Fedora) Other's packages, that I hope to put into Factory: -most of my packages -tsocks -iperf (from jimfunk) - I must copy this because it's a dependency for iperfQt. -dynamips -dynagen -putty -xvidcap -stardict -httrack -unionfs - both FUSE and kernel versions Huh, enough for start ? -- -Alexey Eromenko "Technologov"

That's the problem - they are available, but not in 1 central repository. -- -Alexey Eromenko "Technologov" --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Sat, Aug 9, 2008 at 5:17 PM, Patrick Shanahan wrote:

* Alexey Eremenko [08-09-08 16:10]:

Why you want so badly to mimic every single thing of debian. Just go use debian, then. That might be a great surprise to you, but the reason I use suse is exactly because its very very different from debian. clueless strikes again... Marcio --- Druid --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Right, I don't want to look. I don't want to look a hunder of repositories and I don't want to look over 100,000 sourceforge projects over there. But I do so, because I have no choise. I want to fix this problem and provide many of third-party packages in 1 repository - as a one stop shop. That's what other are doing: Debian/Ubutnu/FreeBSD/ArchLinux/... There is no point in having distro, with this number of repositories. I'm not think we need to close the existing ones (user's projects), but they really should be for experimental project. All stable stuff must be in 1 repo. -- -Alexey Eromenko "Technologov" --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Le lundi 11 août 2008, à 11:41 +0200, Stephan Kulow a écrit :

From https://build.opensuse.org/statistics:

There are now 3534 projects, 48169 packages, 6744 repositories and 8208 confirmed users.

So perhaps debian people are envy about the 30.000 packages openSUSE has more?

How many unique packages for 11.0 (or for Factory) in those 48169 packages? Eg, for GNOME, you have GNOME in openSUSE:Factory (and I guess in openSUSE:11.0, openSUSE:10.3, etc.) then you also have GNOME in GNOME:STABLE and GNOME:Factory, etc. So I'd guess that you have more than one gnome-panel package counted in those 48169 packages... Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Stephan Kulow wrote:

I for one don't want to update the metadata of one _HUGE_ contrib repo if all I need is the latest kiwi update.

Ohh, but please, I don't like the current structure of huge diversity of different repositories across the build service. I can't download 'em all this way. (I like to have everything offline) -- -Alexey Eromenko "Technologov" --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Le lundi 11 août 2008, à 15:04 +0200, Stephan Kulow a écrit :

Am Montag 11 August 2008 schrieb Vincent Untz:

...

Le lundi 11 août 2008, à 11:41 +0200, Stephan Kulow a écrit :

...

From https://build.opensuse.org/statistics:

There are now 3534 projects, 48169 packages, 6744 repositories and 8208 confirmed users.

So perhaps debian people are envy about the 30.000 packages openSUSE has more?

How many unique packages for 11.0 (or for Factory) in those 48169 packages? Eg, for GNOME, you have GNOME in openSUSE:Factory (and I guess in openSUSE:11.0, openSUSE:10.3, etc.) then you also have GNOME in GNOME:STABLE and GNOME:Factory, etc. So I'd guess that you have more than one gnome-panel package counted in those 48169 packages... And debian has 8 different automake versions :)

Heh. I'm merely saying that our statistics cannot be used to illustrate how many different packages are available for one version of openSUSE. I wouldn't be surprised if a real count moves us from 48169 to something like 10000, eg. I don't think that a similar reduction would happen when counting debian packages. (also, I believe that some projects actually depend on a specific version of automake because of some incompatibilities, which is why debian ships more than just the latest version) Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

* Marcus Meissner [2008-08-15 17:02]:

You want "figlet", which does bannering in all kind of ways.

Also vertical banners like “banner” provides? Bernhard -- Bernhard Walle, SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Architecture Development “Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler.” -- Albert Einstein --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 05:12:13PM +0200, Bernhard Walle wrote:

* Marcus Meissner [2008-08-15 17:02]:

...

You want "figlet", which does bannering in all kind of ways.

Also vertical banners like “banner” provides?

You should have tried it yourself. But no, it does not seems to have those. Ciao, Marcus --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Alexey Eremenko escribió:

That's the problem - they are available, but not in 1 central repository.

That's not a problem, its an advantage. -- "A computer is like an Old Testament god, with a lot of rules and no mercy. " Cristian Rodríguez R. Platform/OpenSUSE - Core Services SUSE LINUX Products GmbH Research & Development http://www.opensuse.org/

Hello, on Sonntag, 10. August 2008, Bernhard Walle wrote:

It _is_ a problem. I always end up in having 20 repositories added to my package manager, having lots of updates installed just because I want to have a few programs installed and up to date. And after 9 month of usage, I end up in a reinstallation for $NEXT_RELEASE instead of updating because it's less work for me.

I have currently 14 repos, and always install new versions as update. Yes, sometimes there are some conflicts to solve, but it takes much less time than restoring all config changes etc. I did. (I know there are different opinions on this, and it was discussed often enough. From my POV there's no need to start a long thread again ;-)

All repos in the build service are actively developed and not frozen if a distribution is released. So, for example, I install 'blackbox' from the X11:windowmanagers repository. I that 'blackbox' package would be in openSUSE (directly), then I would not need to update the version just to get security fixes.

Valid point, but you make an assumption: There's someone who backports the security fixes to the version that was in $distribution_release. I'm afraid this will be the bottleneck here :-( Technically, this can be done in the buildservice (by using lots of %if in the specfile to switch between different versions, or by creating a X11:windowmanagers:openSUSE_11.0 project), but the problem is that you need people to backport the fixes.

However, so, I must, and if libxyz is also in that repository, I also get that new version which is probably buggy just because I run "zypper update -t package".

I guess this problem is solved by the vendor stickyness in 11.0 - unless the newer libxyz is needed by the package you want to install/update.

And, honestly, I like "zypper in blablub" more than using "osc search" first to find the right repo. No, and I don't want to open a web browser just to install software.

Sounds like a feature request: If zypper does not find a package on "zypper in", it should search the buildservice and offer to add a repo and install the package from there. You have write access to FATE, don't you? ;-) Regards, Christian Boltz -- Wir sind ja nicht nachtragend, Du wirst uns wieder herzlich willkommen sein, wenn der erste Virus Deine Festplatte formatiert haben wird. Und dann ist auch wieder Platz da fuer Linux :-) [Wolfi in suse-laptop] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Søndag 10 august 2008 16:01:18 skrev Druid:

On Sun, Aug 10, 2008 at 10:49 AM, Christian Boltz wrote:

...

on Sonntag, 10. August 2008, Bernhard Walle wrote:

...

It _is_ a problem. I always end up in having 20 repositories added to my package manager, having lots of updates installed just because I want to have a few programs installed and up to date. And after 9 month of usage, I end up in a reinstallation for $NEXT_RELEASE instead of updating because it's less work for me.

I have currently 14 repos, and always install new versions as update. Yes, sometimes there are some conflicts to solve, but it takes much less time than restoring all config changes etc. I did.

You are all assuming that OSS and the other repos are exactly the same thing. It is not. OSS is the release repo, its frozen, it was tested (was it? I hope so), its a release, should have minimum release quality. Its what people should be using. The other repos are random stuff, non tested, use at your own risk, may break your computer, may eat you.

So yes, there is a big difference between release and stuff in buld service. And no, putting everything together in big repo sounds like a terrible idea.

I dont have 14 repos. I have only the classic oss+packman+updates repos, and a couple of RPMs that came from buildservice or customs, which is what people more or less should stick to, if you ask me. If not, there is no purpose of having a release, we could just be using factory and complaining about brokenness on continuous upgrading, which is what happens in debian anyway...

The repos are separated for a reason.

Just putting everything together in one repo would definitely be a bad idea. But maybe creating some big extra/contrib/community repo that follows the openSUSE release cycle, and is then frozen at release time wouldn't be a bad idea. It shouldn't be a packager playground, and probably shouldn't have packages that are prone to security issues either though. Should be frozen and somewhat tested stuff - the purpose being to provide _more_ packages, not providing latest. Bleeding edge would be available on other smaller dedicated BS repos for experts and adventurous people. Also I think grouping existing BS projects more - and cleaning dublicate and obsolete projects would alleviate many of these complaints about the current BS situation. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

You are all assuming that OSS and the other repos are exactly the same thing. It is not. OSS is the release repo, its frozen, it was tested (was it? I hope so), its a release, should have minimum release quality. Its what people should be using. The other repos are random stuff, non tested, use at your own risk, may break your computer, may eat you.

So yes, there is a big difference between release and stuff in buld service. And no, putting everything together in big repo sounds like a terrible idea.

hi. beg your pardon to interfere this discussion. i'm not an expert, not a programmer, just a person who wish to have an answers. i asked some questions long time ago, may be i asked in a wrong place, may be i was addressed to a wrong persons. could you please be so kind to help me find the answers for this particular situation? the question is: "how to add core EFL/Enlightenment-DR17 into OpenSUSE distribution?" and the second one is: "how to add core EFL/E-DR17 as an option for a OpenSUSE distribution installer?" now let me explain the situation in details. we're all had an option to use this repo and explore new Enlightenment (E): http://download.opensuse.org/pub/opensuse/repositories/X11:/Enlightenment/ it's great and wish to say huge thanks to the maintainers. but the packages in this repo (imho) always outdated and not so stable as a person could require from OpenSUSE. i get used it until discovered that manual build from E-cvs could be much more stable/usable. another point is that some software is best when you're using cvs/svn/git/etc. even RECOMMENDED to be build from cvs. examples - MPlayer, Enlightenment. no need to freeze the snapshot and backport the fixes - just rebuild from source tree and you're fine. finally decided to contribute to OpenSUSE (the distro i'm using since version 8.2). what is already done: 1) two repositories are up and running (for 10.3 and 11.0 mostly): http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/home:/dmitry_serpokryl:/Enlightenm... http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/home:/dmitry_serpokryl:/SOAD/ (last one is for OpenSUSE-10.3 only) packages contain a patch for proper UTF-8 handling and other minor ones. repos contain 'One Click Install' files. example: http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/home:/dmitry_serpokryl:/Enlightenm... also it's possible for all Enlightenment related packages (E16 and E17) to install .src.rpm, rebuild and receive the current cvs code ready for installation. the example of rebuild script is shown here: http://forums.opensuse.org/applications/388815-enlightenment-dr-16-dr-17-a-3... 2) EFL/Enlightenment Live CD was created using 'kiwi' (download page): http://sda.scwlab.com/ 'webalizer' stats show that more than 11000 hits was made in July'08 and iso was downloaded approx 4000 times. can't say exactly because the size of iso was not constant (yep, updates took place). 3) opened the thread in OpenSUSE forum to provide the support for users: http://forums.opensuse.org/applications/388815-enlightenment-dr-16-dr-17-a.h... conclusion (imho of cource): a) the best distribution of EFL/E is provided for OpenSUSE-10.3/11.0 users b) looks like now i'm de-facto the only maintainer of EFL/E for OpenSUSE 10.3 and 11.0 now back to the case. i asked what should i do next and not received a single response on my email (Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 02:48:53 +0400, From: sda , To:opensuse-packaging@opensuse.org, Subject: Re: [opensuse-packaging] Packages check for compliance). that's the story. i'd appreciate ANY response and hope that in case of negative ones i'd be able to see the reasons and improve my modest contribution. no doubt that .spec files could be improved. i'm not going to say that i did all in the way of strict compliance also. but something is done, packages are up to the current cvs, i test the stability of cvs snapshot before upload to OBS and no complains yet from users. best regards. dmitry serpokryl (sda aka sda00)

I dont have 14 repos. I have only the classic oss+packman+updates repos, and a couple of RPMs that came from buildservice or customs, which is what people more or less should stick to, if you ask me. If not, there is no purpose of having a release, we could just be using factory and complaining about brokenness on continuous upgrading, which is what happens in debian anyway...

The repos are separated for a reason.

Marcio --- Druid --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Hello, on Sonntag, 10. August 2008, Bernhard Walle wrote:

* Christian Boltz [2008-08-10 15:49]:

...

on Sonntag, 10. August 2008, Bernhard Walle wrote:

...

...

All repos in the build service are actively developed and not frozen if a distribution is released. So, for example, I install 'blackbox' from the X11:windowmanagers repository. I that 'blackbox' package would be in openSUSE (directly), then I would not need to update the version just to get security fixes.

Valid point, but you make an assumption: There's someone who backports the security fixes to the version that was in $distribution_release. I'm afraid this will be the bottleneck here :-(

Well, it would be ok for me that if a security problem is encountered, that (and only that) package is updated to latest upstream version.

Basically this method sounds good and is more likely doable in practise than backporting fixes. (I just wonder about what would have happened if PHP4 would not have been in the distro and there would have been a "security update" to PHP5 ;-) Fortunately the difference between different versions is not that big in most packages.

...

...

However, so, I must, and if libxyz is also in that repository, I also get that new version which is probably buggy just because I run "zypper update -t package".

I guess this problem is solved by the vendor stickyness in 11.0 - unless the newer libxyz is needed by the package you want to install/update.

What is “vendor stickyness”, i.e. where can I configure that for a repo?

It should be active by default and means that YaST and zypper will ask before taking a package from a different vendor. Here's an example where you can see it in action: # zypper search --details --match-exact ktorrent Reading installed packages... S | Name | Type | Version | Arch | Repository --+----------+---------+--------------+------+------------------------- v | ktorrent | package | 3.1.2-0.pm.1 | i586 | Packman 11.0 i | ktorrent | package | 3.0.2-22.1 | i586 | Haupt-Repository (Open Source Software - OSS) I have the package from 11.0 OSS repo installed, packman offers a newer one. # zypper up -t package ktorrent Reading installed packages... Problem: cannot install both ktorrent-3.0.2-22.1.i586 and ktorrent-3.1.2-0.pm.1.i586 Solution 1: install ktorrent-3.1.2-0.pm.1.i586 (with vendor change) SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nuernberg, Germany --> packman.links2linux.de Solution 2: do not ask to install a solvable providing ktorrent > 3.0.2-22.1 Choose from above solutions by number or cancel [1/2/C]: Solution 1 would be a vendor change, solution 2 enforces the vendor stickyness (will result in "nothing to do" here). Regards, Christian Boltz -- Wenn man bedenkt, dass die Leute vor 150 Jahren ihre E-Mails noch bei Kerzenlicht geschrieben haben... [Marianne Kestler, de.admin.net-abuse.mail, 6.5.2000] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Sat, Aug 09, 2008 at 07:41:00PM +0200, Per Jessen wrote:

I don't want to flog a dead horse, and I'm also perfectly happy with the compromise we found, but the deprecation of JFS and now more recently LILO were clearly Novell decisions, not community decisions.

I think perhaps the case of JFS was a good start - it's still part of YaST, yet clearly marked as unsupported.

JFS is unsupported upstream, that is what drove that decision. IBM is no longer doing any new development of it and only very little bug work for it, if any. So that is why it is marked unsupported in our distro, we are just mirroring the upstream community involvement there. thanks, greg k-h --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Sat, Aug 09, 2008 at 09:04:32PM +0200, Per Jessen wrote:

Greg KH wrote:

...

On Sat, Aug 09, 2008 at 07:41:00PM +0200, Per Jessen wrote:

...

I don't want to flog a dead horse, and I'm also perfectly happy with the compromise we found, but the deprecation of JFS and now more recently LILO were clearly Novell decisions, not community decisions.

I think perhaps the case of JFS was a good start - it's still part of YaST, yet clearly marked as unsupported.

JFS is unsupported upstream, that is what drove that decision. IBM is no longer doing any new development of it and only very little bug work for it, if any.

To my knowledge, Dave Kleikamp still does active JFS support. The latest release of jfsutils is not even a month old.

Have you asked him what his full-time involvement for JFS really is? Hint, it's really in maintenance mode only... If you really want to use JFS, you can, but it's not something that we can support due to no one willing/able to do it. If you wish to step up and do such a thing, we will be glad to reconsider such markings. thanks, greg k-h --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Alexey Eremenko wrote:

Basically we, The Linux community, lost 2 (!) filesystems in few years: JFS, and ResiserFS (3/4).

While nothing in exchange was developed :( sad :(

ext4? Nothing prevent the community from being upstream again, that's the power of Free Software. But working on filesystems and making them reliable and performant IS a real expertise, more than just a Sunday hacking job. Even reiserfs was not a one man effort. Hub --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

"Alexey Eremenko" writes:

Basically we, The Linux community, lost 2 (!) filesystems in few years: JFS, and ResiserFS (3/4).

While nothing in exchange was developed :( sad :(

A lot of file systems have been developed, let me just mention three recent ones where the first two are real competition to those that you mention: * btrfs - about which Ted T'so said (http://kerneltrap.org/Linux/Reiser4_Update): "people who really like reiser4 might want to take a look at btrfs; it has a number of the same design ideas that reiser3/4 had --- except (a) the filesystem format has support for some advanced features that are designed to leapfrog ZFS, (b) the maintainer is not a crazy man and works well with other LKML developers (free hint: if your code needs to be reviewed to get in, and reviewers are scarce; don't insult and abuse the volunteer reviewers as Hans did --- Not a good plan!)." * ext4 * ocfs2 Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, Director Platform / openSUSE, aj@suse.de SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126

On Sun, 10 Aug 2008, peter nikolic wrote:

Well is btrfs in the distro yet ?? if not we have still in a net loss overall

What is the loss? I *hope* we aren't just counting numbers of file systems here... Gerald -- Dr. Gerald Pfeifer E gp@novell.com SUSE Linux Products GmbH Director Inbound Product Mgmt T +49(911)74053-0 HRB 16746 (AG Nuremberg) openSUSE/SUSE Linux Enterprise F +49(911)74053-483 GF: Markus Rex --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Greg KH wrote:

On Sat, Aug 09, 2008 at 09:04:32PM +0200, Per Jessen wrote:

...

Greg KH wrote:

...

On Sat, Aug 09, 2008 at 07:41:00PM +0200, Per Jessen wrote:

...

I don't want to flog a dead horse, and I'm also perfectly happy with the compromise we found, but the deprecation of JFS and now more recently LILO were clearly Novell decisions, not community decisions.

I think perhaps the case of JFS was a good start - it's still part of YaST, yet clearly marked as unsupported.

JFS is unsupported upstream, that is what drove that decision. IBM is no longer doing any new development of it and only very little bug work for it, if any.

To my knowledge, Dave Kleikamp still does active JFS support. The latest release of jfsutils is not even a month old.

Have you asked him what his full-time involvement for JFS really is? Hint, it's really in maintenance mode only...

Oh, certainly - but that sounds like it IS supported upstream ... Anyway, that discussion is really long over.

If you really want to use JFS, you can, but it's not something that we can support due to no one willing/able to do it.

Which is fair enough.

If you wish to step up and do such a thing, we will be glad to reconsider such markings.

Well, for starters the option needs to be open and people need to know it's there. For myself, I probably don't have the necessary knowledge right now to start actively supporting something or other in YaST, but that's something that can be sorted out. /Per Jessen, Zürich --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Andreas Jaeger wrote:

...

I don't want to flog a dead horse, and I'm also perfectly happy with the compromise we found, but the deprecation of JFS and now more recently LILO were clearly Novell decisions, not community decisions.

Let me ask differently: What do you consider a community decision? If one person complains loudly and the rest is silent? Should we vote for everything - and who should?

I guess the best answer is another question - how do other projects manage this?

...

I think perhaps the case of JFS was a good start - it's still part of YaST, yet clearly marked as unsupported. Why not do the same with e.g. LILO ? That way you leave the door open for someone to step in and take over the support. And maybe even submit a patch or two.

As Stano said: The yast-bootloader is a beast that needs to be simplified to reduce the complexity of it - and that's why we rip out lilo support. If there are some people that would like to stand up and take over the lilo support in yast-booloader and friends, then say it and discuss it with Stano!

I think that's cool - I might very well sign up for it. (not having had much luck with my first baby steps with GRUB today). /Per Jessen, Zürich --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Sat, 9 Aug 2008, Andreas Jaeger wrote:

Let's look how other open source projects basically work (very simplified):

The open source developers work on those areas that they consider critical and are interesting for them to work on. They do look at bug reports, feature requests etc and decide what's in their view is best for the project.

For many projects like the Linux kernel or GCC "are interesting for them to work on" should be extended by "...and/or that they are paid to work on". Realistically, the majority of developers for many key Free Software or Open Source projects are paid to work on these projects, and often receive very clear direction on what to work on. Novell, in the form of SUSE Labs and innovation time for engineers, actually is one of those companies granting quite some flexibility here compared to others. And of course many of us, be it those that are paid to develop or those that are not (like me), donate often significant amounts of our own time as well. :-) Gerald -- Dr. Gerald Pfeifer E gp@novell.com SUSE Linux Products GmbH Director Inbound Product Mgmt T +49(911)74053-0 HRB 16746 (AG Nuremberg) openSUSE/SUSE Linux Enterprise F +49(911)74053-483 GF: Markus Rex --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org