Dear Jan,
2.) Key ideas:
* reduce the number of packages in Factory - provide smaller, stable, high quality core distro - provide Long Term Support (LTS) for this reduced set - core suitable for servers - available for more platforms (including ARM, PowerPC, etc.) * provide platform for building derivatives around core distro (onion model) - building blocks - software grouped by theme (Build Service - repositories)
I object to this strategy. A few years ago, there were voices that said "but Debian has more packages", now that we have the OBS, the problem still is not really gone.
First you would have to add extra repositories, that alone is unacceptible. Having to manually add packman & personal repo already does not scale to well.
Already today, we see posts by forum visitors (and/or other communication media) who seem to have utterly many reopsitories just because they think it is cool or something, when in fact, they are on the edge of breaking something in the process, and nobody wants to deal with the "mess" of finding where exactly in those umpteenth repositories the problem comes from.
I also am inclined to call this a Windows model, where you spend extra time installing all the non-core stuff. Linux distributions' strengths have always been to have more software agglomerated in a single location.
Then, repositories often carry packages also found in others. It raises the problem which to choose.
I totally agree on that, but it's a problem we have in general. At our university (and in our German forums), most support cases are related to 3rd party repositories, replacing core packages. One option is not to only display home: repos at software.opensuse.org (are they already hidden? not hitting them very often, now but the advanced search option is checked by default). Another good thing would be something like a rating platform. Greets Marcus -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org