Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-features (166 mails)

< Previous Next >
[openFATE 313030] AppSet instead of Apper
Feature changed by: Tim Edwards (tk83)
Feature #313030, revision 7
Title: AppSet instead of Apper

openSUSE Distribution: Unconfirmed
Priority
Requester: Desirable

Requested by: Simone Dedo (templare)
Partner organization: openSUSE.org

Description:
AppSet http://appset.altervista.org/joomla/en can be the default
package manager on openSUSE cause, is written in QT and other
distribution such Archlinux and Chakra Linux (know for his addiction
with KDE desktop). 1)Automatical generation of applications sections
(games, office, multimedia, internet etc.) 2)An embedded web browser
that shows selected applications homepages 3)An embedded feed reader
that shows news from configured distribution 4)A Tray Icon that
periodically shows available upgrades 5)The possibility to choose a
touchscreen suitable and animated view 6)Administrator packages
management (Upgrades, installs, removes applications) 7)Periodical
packages database update 8)Checks dependencies contraints 9)
Authentication structure that uses what is already installed to get
administrative privileges (only when needed), searching from {kdesu,
gksu, beesu, xdg-su or at least an xterm where it executes a sudo
command} 10)Cache cleaner tool (to free disk space) 11)Can use ad-hoc
libraries for a specific distribution or, like in default, it uses an
already existing package manager CLI frontend 11)Requires only Qt libs
as installation dependency
What about?

Business case (Partner benefit):
openSUSE.org: I believe AppSet can be a better package manager instead
of KpackageKit or Apper (a new on openSUSE 12.1).


Discussion:
#1: Danny Roberts (kemra102) (2011-12-05 10:48:28)
I think there is value in adding it as an optional package 1st so that
people can test and evaluate the application before making it the
default.

#2: Tim Edwards (tk83) (2011-12-05 11:42:19)
Does it use PackageKit? I'd have thought the last thing we need is to
re-invent the wheel from scratch given how much work has gone into
getting packagekit's zypp backend working.
I reckon the best thing is to package it in the repositories and let
people test it.

#3: melchiaros melchiaros (melchiaros) (2011-12-05 18:59:25)
In past there were many problems with KPackageKit, not only on
openSUSE.
My interest is: Is it more stable and did it not behave like a donkey
when you try to kill it than KPackageKit?

+ #4: Tim Edwards (tk83) (2011-12-05 19:16:46) (reply to #3)
+ KPackageKit and PackageKit are two different things. Both KPackageKit
+ and the new version (called 'Apper') use PackageKit as the package
+ installation backend, and to be fair a lot of the problems in 11.4 were
+ actually problems in how PackageKit interfaces with zypp.
+ In short the point I was making is that building a piece of software
+ that interfaces with zypp is complex, because zypp itself is complex.
+ So yeah package this up and see how it goes, but I'd be interested to
+ know how it interfaces with the underlying packaging system (zypp) and
+ why that's going to be better than PackageKit with all the work that's
+ gone into it.




--
openSUSE Feature:
https://features.opensuse.org/313030

< Previous Next >
This Thread
References