Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (4398 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse] Packages from a user and Packager perspective
  • From: Henne Vogelsang <hvogel@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 15:47:44 +0200
  • Message-id: <20050906134744.GO31287@xxxxxxx>
Hi,

On Tuesday, September 06, 2005 at 14:58:38, Pascal Bleser wrote:
> Henne Vogelsang wrote:
> > On Tuesday, September 06, 2005 at 13:48:25, Pascal Bleser wrote:
> > > Henne Vogelsang wrote:
>
> > > What would be nice, regarding that, is to have the possibility of
> > > letting users post their experience with the packages through some
> > > web interface. When an "unstable" package has a certain amount of
> > > positive feedback from users, it's being promoted to "stable".
> > >
> > > And "testing" packages simply get promoted to "unstable" when they
> > > have been reviewed by at least 1 or 2 experienced packagers.
> >
> > You see? Thats what im talking about. Why has this to be tied to
> > package classes like stable, unstable, testing? Why cant you just do
> > that for every single package?
>
> Because to me, IMVHO, the best option to implement that would be to
> have different repositories. One for stable, one for unstable and one
> for testing (or call it "trusted", "untested" and "untrusted"). Like
> that every user can choose what repositories he wants to see in YaST2.
>
> In a way, it actually is a state or "quality label" that's down to
> every single package.

Its a quality label of a whole "package set". The problems is see with
this approach are:

Who controls what is in these package sets? A small
group of people like a technical board? Does Novell engeniering do?

How do you decide "package sets"? Does the technical board have a look
at the individual packages? Or do you just trust some maintainers?

You see were that gets you at? It takes away the power from all people
and puts that into the hand of some.

> But there's also another aspect: the version of the software itself.
> Let me pick an example. I package gqview. There are two versions: one
> stable (2.0.x) and one beta version (2.1.x).
>
> [ ... ]
>
> Unfortunately, apt, yum and YaST2 don't really support that kind of
> things.

Cool. Something to improve to make the (openSUSE) world a better place
:)

> Note that you're all ranting on what I say and beating me up in every
> reply

C'mon! We all love you and you know that :)

Were just discussing on how to approach packaging here and i very much
like that we are comparing these two approaches. Only good things can
come out of this!

> Henne, how do you want to implement "Why cant you just do that for
> every single package?" ?

In the surrounding system that you use as frontend to /bin/rpm. In the
package manager, installation source creation and in the website. Or do
you mean implementation details? I dont have those. Thats why we are
discussing here. To find out what we want :)

Henne

--
Henne Vogelsang, Subsystems
"Rules change. The Game remains the same."
- Omar (The Wire)

< Previous Next >