[opensuse-gnome] GNOME: repository maintenance
Hello With the imminent release of openSUSE 11.0, it's time once again to take a good look at our repositories in the Build Service. JP, Dirk from the KDE team, and I discussed this earlier today, and we've come up with the following proposal. (To be fair, it was Dirk who did, and he convinced JP and me that he was right. ;) He proposed a very similar organization for KDE here: http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-kde/2008-06/msg00010.html) * GNOME:STABLE - This will contain GNOME roughly as shipped with the last shipped version of openSUSE. So, Real Soon Now (tm) it will contain GNOME 2.22.x. The term "STABLE" can cause some confusion, so to clarify, it means a distribution of GNOME that we have deemed stable, tested, etc. As such, it may sometimes lag the most recent release released as stable by upstream. * GNOME:Factory - Here is where development for the next version of openSUSE will happen. We've made some previous attempts to do our development in the Build Service that were not so successful, for a variety of reasons. But this time, with improved tools and greater determination, I think we can make it work for real. http://en.opensuse.org/Build_Service/Collaboration describes some of the Build Service's new capabilities. I'm looking forward to seeing good stuff coming in now that it's so much easier to contribute changes. * GNOME:UNSTABLE - I expect this project to lie fallow most of the time. * GNOME:Community - This project will continue as is. Questions, comments, or concerns? Or corrections? :) Michael. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
Mike, et al:
* GNOME:STABLE
Makes sense. Whatever is our latest released product is "STABLE" for us basically.
* GNOME:Factory
Great idea, especially if it makes it easier for non-Novell team members to contribute.
* GNOME:UNSTABLE - I expect this project to lie fallow most of the time.
Actually, how about we just put it out of everyone's misery? :)
* GNOME:Community - This project will continue as is.
Except it will grow and improve and ultimately take over the world! In terms of target repositories, G:C and G:F should build against every product including Factory (think about it for a moment and G:F/openSUSE_Factory makes sense), G:S against everything EXCEPT Factory. Also, for released products, they should ALWAYS use the Update repository. James -- James Ogley, openSUSE Member: GNOME Team and Planet SUSE. riggwelter@opensuse.org http://opensuse.org/GNOME http://planetsuse.org openSUSE: Get It, Discover It, Create It at http://www.opensuse.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
James Ogley wrote:
Mike, et al:
* GNOME:STABLE
Makes sense. Whatever is our latest released product is "STABLE" for us basically.
* GNOME:Factory
Great idea, especially if it makes it easier for non-Novell team members to contribute.
I would be even more radical. The current design of GNOME:* was created in past, when OBS was not able of joining of projects when building and one-click install did not exist. Nowadays, things have changed and the layout all-in-one seems to be obsolete. It consists from several types of packages: GNOME core packages following GNOME release cycle GNOME platform packages following GNOME release cycle GNOME based packages not following GNOME release cycle GTK+2 packages following GTK+ release cycle GTK+2 based packages not following any release cycle Gstreamer packages random packages present only as dependencines random packages (and mono package) present only as gnome-maintainers@ stuff. So I would like to propose: GNOME platform: Keep the two-repos concept. GTK+ platform: Ditto, may have its own repos or use GNOME repos. Applications: Create a separate repository of applications, which don't follow GNOME/GTK+ release cycle. Maybe even better, drop many of them. For example gqview or GIMP development would fit much better to multimedia:photo than GNOME:UNSTABLE. Gstreamer: I am thinking about move to multimedia:something altogether with multimedia libraries. It would make Gstreamer build simpler. randmom packages: remove them mono packages and mono based packages: check whether they are in mono projects and move or drop in GNOME repos. -- Best Regards / S pozdravem, Stanislav Brabec software developer --------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX, s. r. o. e-mail: sbrabec@suse.cz Lihovarská 1060/12 tel: +420 284 028 966, +49 911 740538747 190 00 Praha 9 fax: +420 284 028 951 Czech Republic http://www.suse.cz/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
On Mon, 2008-06-16 at 11:20 +0200, Stanislav Brabec wrote:
So I would like to propose:
GNOME platform: Keep the two-repos concept.
GTK+ platform: Ditto, may have its own repos or use GNOME repos.
I wonder how many people who just want to install the software care about the difference. Some people who use XFCE probably do, but they also tend to know what they're doing and are able to avoid installing apps that pull in all sorts of GNOME dependencies if that's really what they want to do.
Applications: Create a separate repository of applications, which don't follow GNOME/GTK+ release cycle. Maybe even better, drop many of them. For example gqview or GIMP development would fit much better to multimedia:photo than GNOME:UNSTABLE.
Maybe. I guess it depends on how the "man on street" goes about looking for, say, the latest pidgin or inkscape.
Gstreamer: I am thinking about move to multimedia:something altogether with multimedia libraries. It would make Gstreamer build simpler.
randmom packages: remove them
mono packages and mono based packages: check whether they are in mono projects and move or drop in GNOME repos.
For apps that happen to be written in mono, who cares? They should stay in GNOME: or go somewhere more specific. For things like dependencies, though, I think I agree. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
Michael Wolf wrote:
On Mon, 2008-06-16 at 11:20 +0200, Stanislav Brabec wrote:
So I would like to propose:
GNOME platform: Keep the two-repos concept.
GTK+ platform: Ditto, may have its own repos or use GNOME repos.
I wonder how many people who just want to install the software care about the difference. Some people who use XFCE probably do, but they also tend to know what they're doing and are able to avoid installing apps that pull in all sorts of GNOME dependencies if that's really what they want to do.
Well. For example, latest gimp-unstable in multimedia:photo fails in older products due to too old GTK+. I have to base its build on the whole GNOME:STABLE. It's bad fot most users, because they will get rolling updates of the whole GNOME instead of only multimedia:photo and GTK+. As repository dependencies work well in the latest zypp, I would like more repositories.
Applications: Create a separate repository of applications, which don't follow GNOME/GTK+ release cycle. Maybe even better, drop many of them. For example gqview or GIMP development would fit much better to multimedia:photo than GNOME:UNSTABLE.
Maybe. I guess it depends on how the "man on street" goes about looking for, say, the latest pidgin or inkscape.
Gstreamer: I am thinking about move to multimedia:something altogether with multimedia libraries. It would make Gstreamer build simpler.
randmom packages: remove them
mono packages and mono based packages: check whether they are in mono projects and move or drop in GNOME repos.
For apps that happen to be written in mono, who cares? They should stay in GNOME: or go somewhere more specific. For things like dependencies, though, I think I agree.
People who want only the latest GNOME:STABLE would probably not carry about problems of update to the latest mono. That is why I would like to see mono applications separately, so only people who really want the latest mono will have to install it. The same problem exists with gstreamer: GNOME can work well with older gstreamer version, update to the latest gstreamer version would require update of many multimedia libraries. Having more repositories would allow users to install (and subscribe for rolling updates) for a minimal set of packages. -- Best Regards / S pozdravem, Stanislav Brabec software developer --------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX, s. r. o. e-mail: sbrabec@suse.cz Lihovarská 1060/12 tel: +420 284 028 966, +49 911 740538747 190 00 Praha 9 fax: +420 284 028 951 Czech Republic http://www.suse.cz/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 10:56 +0100, James Ogley wrote:
Mike, et al:
* GNOME:STABLE
Makes sense. Whatever is our latest released product is "STABLE" for us basically.
Right, so it's worth mentioning that this theoretically could be an odd-numbered GNOME release. Unlikely (no such plans exist), but not impossible.
* GNOME:Factory
Great idea, especially if it makes it easier for non-Novell team members to contribute.
* GNOME:UNSTABLE - I expect this project to lie fallow most of the time.
Actually, how about we just put it out of everyone's misery? :)
Yeah, I don't think there's any value in keeping this around. In theory I guess we could use it to get a head start on the next major GNOME version; in practice, I don't think that's likely to happen.
* GNOME:Community - This project will continue as is.
Except it will grow and improve and ultimately take over the world!
In terms of target repositories, G:C and G:F should build against every product including Factory (think about it for a moment and G:F/openSUSE_Factory makes sense), G:S against everything EXCEPT Factory.
I'm trying to come up with a good reason why G:S should build against Factory and I can't. So I think you're right. :)
Also, for released products, they should ALWAYS use the Update repository.
Yep. Michael. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
* GNOME:STABLE Right, so it's worth mentioning that this theoretically could be an odd-numbered GNOME release. Unlikely (no such plans exist), but not impossible.
And in the event that happened, we would have been satisfied that it was stable enough for inclusion in a released product :)
I'm trying to come up with a good reason why G:S should build against Factory and I can't. So I think you're right. :)
I'll never tire of hearing that :)
Also, for released products, they should ALWAYS use the Update repository. Yep.
This is done now. -- James Ogley, openSUSE Member: GNOME Team and Planet SUSE. riggwelter@opensuse.org http://opensuse.org/GNOME http://planetsuse.org openSUSE: Get It, Discover It, Create It at http://www.opensuse.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
On Tue, 2008-06-17 at 20:25 -0500, Michael Wolf wrote:
* GNOME:Factory
Great idea, especially if it makes it easier for non-Novell team members to contribute.
* GNOME:UNSTABLE - I expect this project to lie fallow most of the time.
Actually, how about we just put it out of everyone's misery? :)
Yeah, I don't think there's any value in keeping this around. In theory I guess we could use it to get a head start on the next major GNOME version; in practice, I don't think that's likely to happen.
well, it's going to happen via the build brigade integration, but as we
already talked, that's better placed in GNOME:snapshots*, as you set up
--
Rodrigo Moya
participants (4)
-
James Ogley -
Michael Wolf -
Rodrigo Moya -
Stanislav Brabec