[opensuse-project] package wishlists
With regards to package wishlists on the website[1]. There are several requests for packages that are already available through the build service / packman / guru. Is it preferable to link to these available packages (bearing in mind that build service packages especially may not be production ready), either with or without a disclaimer that the packages therein may not be of the standard expected, or to remove them as they are available elsewhere (esp in a more popular source, such as pm or guru)? On occasion, links have been supplied to, for eg, packman resources, only for the user to complain that it's not part of the official openSUSE builds and therefore less desirable[2]. Personally I tend to trust packman (and indeed guru and several build service) builds having used them for ages. My question is more about the intent of these pages. Is it to provide any link (no matter how reliable) to SUSE rpms, or is it to provide links to better known (or only official) builds? I think the essential issue is that of relationship of trust built up between a (group of) user(s) and a particular packager. Perhaps a revamp of the wishlist pages is in order, something along the lines of wishlist items that are (or perhaps in factory), officially fulfilled, and a list of repos that are available (unofficially, and stated as such). Regards Craig [1] http://en.opensuse.org/Package_Wishlist [2] "It is packaged in the PackMan repository but not directly in OpenSuse" - one particular quote. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
With regards to package wishlists on the website[1]. There are several requests for packages that are already available through the build service / if the package is already on opensuse.org, can we put links to them in an "Education" update channel in the future? LRUPp seems to have linked
On Tue, 2006-12-19 at 01:43 +0000, Craig Millar wrote: the moodle packages from his /home:lrupp folder to education:server. if a package belongs in education:server folder, could you, would you link it please? same for education:desktop. please. I'd like to turn those two "channels" into the most trusted education software sites in the world!
packman / guru. Is it preferable to link to these available packages (bearing in mind that build service packages especially may not be production ready), why not ??? new tag line for the download service at opensuse, "Certified for OpenSUSE!" Does the build service repackage finished RPM's? if so I'd like to see all usable packages that are legally available as OSS brought into the BS for official product compatibility. one stop shop to build a school. (network)
either with or without a disclaimer that the packages therein may not be of the standard expected, or to remove them as they are available elsewhere (esp in a more popular source, such as pm or guru)?
shouldn't "guru" want to mirror us rather than us mirror him? frees up his disk space for other projects? openSUSE needs to become the default repo for all OpenSUSE users, this will help marketing and usability perceptions. The packages we can't offer should be the domain of other repo's i.e joe smith gives his child his old laptop , it runs w2k but it doesn't have support. joe smith says "hey, OpenSUSE will run on this why buy XP", downloads, installs , updates opensuse and says hey I'd like (insert RPM) package. he goes to the software updater, looks for the package and it's there. he sees an add for "long term support subscriptions" upgrades to SLED and is "happy as a clam" if it's not, then he goes elsewhere to find his package.
On occasion, links have been supplied to, for eg, packman resources, only for the user to complain that it's not part of the official openSUSE builds and therefore less desirable[2].
my point exactly
Personally I tend to trust packman (and indeed guru and several build service) builds having used them for ages. My question is more about the intent of these pages. Is it to provide any link (no matter how reliable) to SUSE rpms, or is it to provide links to better known (or only official) builds? I trust them too, but let the more "experimental" users find the other repo's
I think the essential issue is that of relationship of trust built up between a (group of) user(s) and a particular packager. everyone opensuse Perhaps a revamp of the wishlist pages is in order, something along the lines of wishlist items that are (or perhaps in factory), officially fulfilled,
do we need more specifics in writing regarding what can be wished for?
and a list of repos that are available (unofficially, and stated as such). I don't think we can officially or unofficially point to repo's that offer "illegal" packages that infringe pattens or copyrights
Craig, As much as I would like to take the easy route, I believe we owe it to OpenSUSE to bring everything SUSE under it's roof. if the BS doesn't currently have the tools for us to bring in existing RPM's, it should. I would like to be able to find an RPM elsewhere and bring it to the BS and make it "certified" and available according to category and repackaged for all current versions of OpenSUSE. Please, if I have misinterpreted any of your positions, let me know. James --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Craig Millar wrote:
With regards to package wishlists on the website[1]. There are several requests for packages that are already available through the build service / packman / guru. Is it preferable to link to these available packages (bearing in mind that build service packages especially may not be production ready), either with or without a disclaimer that the packages therein may not be of the standard expected, or to remove them as they are available elsewhere (esp in a more popular source, such as pm or guru)?
Most packages in the build service are not less production ready than on Packman or Guru ;) "Production ready" or not only comes down to one thing: testing. Unless/until there is a rating/feedback system, a bugtracker, and/or stable/experimental branches we don't see how well packages have been tested. And we're missing such a system in the build service as well as on the packman and guru websites. But indeed, the real question is: should they be removed from the wishlist if they are already available in a repository that is not SUSE *.* nor Factory.
On occasion, links have been supplied to, for eg, packman resources, only for the user to complain that it's not part of the official openSUSE builds and therefore less desirable[2].
Hm. Yeah, but people have to understand that we can't have dozens and dozens of packages added to the distribution. The distribution is limited in terms or resources (packagers working for Novell) and media (CD/DVD disk space). OTOH, people might want a few of those packages on the wishlist to be added to the distribution. Others might want to just have a package, doesn't matter if it comes from the distro, a build service, packman or guru repository (or another community repository, for that matter).
Personally I tend to trust packman (and indeed guru and several build service) builds having used them for ages. My question is more about the intent of these pages. Is it to provide any link (no matter how reliable) to SUSE rpms, or is it to provide links to better known (or only official) builds?
Good question indeed.
I think the essential issue is that of relationship of trust built up between a (group of) user(s) and a particular packager. Perhaps a revamp of the wishlist pages is in order, something along the lines of wishlist items that are (or perhaps in factory), officially fulfilled, and a list of repos that are available (unofficially, and stated as such). [1] http://en.opensuse.org/Package_Wishlist [2] "It is packaged in the PackMan repository but not directly in OpenSuse" - one particular quote.
cheers - -- -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/ /\\ <pascal.bleser@skynet.be> <guru@unixtech.be> _\_v The more things change, the more they stay insane. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFh4GUr3NMWliFcXcRAo0uAJ9Vf0BfZ+dc1WFXn4FIX/NRi7smcgCfXhNr hSXPJtKEo89uPVKd4dndmqc= =m4B9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
On Tuesday 19 December 2006 00:07, Pascal Bleser wrote:
Personally I tend to trust packman (and indeed guru and several build service) builds having used them for ages. My question is more about the intent of these pages. Is it to provide any link (no matter how reliable) to SUSE rpms, or is it to provide links to better known (or only official) builds?
Good question indeed.
This is good idea, to put link to package next to whish list entry. That will mark that we already have that package and prevent future entries. The other method might be to leave wish list entry to prevent new proposals and add link to the page where will be listed packages that we have in a build service repository. What do you think? -- Regards, Rajko. http://en.opensuse.org/MiniSUSE http://en.opensuse.org/Portal --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
Am Wednesday 20 December 2006 02:43 schrieb Rajko M.:
On Tuesday 19 December 2006 00:07, Pascal Bleser wrote:
Personally I tend to trust packman (and indeed guru and several build service) builds having used them for ages. My question is more about the intent of these pages. Is it to provide any link (no matter how reliable) to SUSE rpms, or is it to provide links to better known (or only official) builds?
Good question indeed.
This is good idea, to put link to package next to whish list entry. That will mark that we already have that package and prevent future entries.
The other method might be to leave wish list entry to prevent new proposals and add link to the page where will be listed packages that we have in a build service repository.
What do you think?
The main problem here is that you can not trust all packages in the build service (and I suppose also not all at packman) in an equal way. Some packages use sources from less or more trusted projects, some only from some single deveoper and so on. And the packages are also created by complete different people. This is something we want to target with a trust and rating system in future, but there no detailed plans yet :/ bye adrian -- Adrian Schroeter SUSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nuernberg, Germany email: adrian@suse.de --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
On Wed, 2006-12-20 at 11:03 +0100, Adrian Schröter wrote:
Am Wednesday 20 December 2006 02:43 schrieb Rajko M.:
On Tuesday 19 December 2006 00:07, Pascal Bleser wrote:
Personally I tend to trust packman (and indeed guru and several build service) builds having used them for ages. My question is more about the intent of these pages. Is it to provide any link (no matter how reliable) to SUSE rpms, or is it to provide links to better known (or only official) builds?
Good question indeed.
This is good idea, to put link to package next to whish list entry. That will mark that we already have that package and prevent future entries.
The other method might be to leave wish list entry to prevent new proposals and add link to the page where will be listed packages that we have in a build service repository.
What do you think?
The main problem here is that you can not trust all packages in the build service (and I suppose also not all at packman) in an equal way.
Some packages use sources from less or more trusted projects, some only from some single deveoper and so on. And the packages are also created by complete different people.
This is something we want to target with a trust and rating system in future, but there no detailed plans yet :/
bye adrian
Hey guys, Sorry I got a little confused about which wishlist was being discussed, LOL, being so vain I thought it was /education#wishlist LOL. I was wondering if there could be a page that is like the gui for SmartPM where you can type in a title and it searches our site for download info on the package and presents the info and\or its download location? This could eventually present the trust\rating info too. it could record each download, if the bug report info gets into the rpm format, then it could also record the number of bug reports, the difference between the #of downloads to the #of bug reports could be a "Trust Rating". On the subject of downloads and wishlists, could we also set a section of the middle of http://en.opensuse.org/Welcome_to_openSUSE.org under "Getting OpenSUSE" called "Getting Software that runs on OpenSUSE" or "Getting software Certified by OpenSUSE"? couldn't this point to the above search tool eventually? is that a Henne question? In my opinion finding the ftp is still to hard, because the main download link on the left points to downloading OpenSUSE and it isn't clear where to go to get ISV stuff for OpenSUSE. The "Package Repository" link\page points mainly to updates to packages delivered in OpenSUSE. I may be thinking to much like a newbie but isn't that who we want to attract? JT --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
On Wednesday 20 December 2006 04:03, Adrian Schröter wrote:
The main problem here is that you can not trust all packages in the build service (and I suppose also not all at packman) in an equal way.
Some packages use sources from less or more trusted projects, some only from some single deveoper and so on. And the packages are also created by complete different people.
This is something we want to target with a trust and rating system in future, but there no detailed plans yet :/
Remark about sources of software might be enough for now, just as you stated above, but the trust system has to be in function as soon as possible, as it will add value to the software in repositories and recognition to authors. -- Regards, Rajko. http://en.opensuse.org/MiniSUSE http://en.opensuse.org/Portal --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
you mean links like I have now? JT --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
On Wednesday 20 December 2006 06:14, James Tremblay wrote:
you mean links like I have now? JT
I meant links to packages in build service repository at http://repos.opensuse.org/ but only to already compiled packages that can be downloaded and installed. BTW, I tried to download Centre to see what it is about, but there was nothing. I guess somebody has to build it. You have Lars Rupp (he is SUSE guy) and Jay Migliaccio on the list of current project members as packagers. Do you have contact with them? -- Regards, Rajko. http://en.opensuse.org/MiniSUSE http://en.opensuse.org/Portal --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
participants (5)
-
Adrian Schröter -
Craig Millar -
James Tremblay -
Pascal Bleser -
Rajko M.