[packaging] Meeting next week to discuss trusted third-party repositories

[Thomas Leonard]

2008/12/10 Peter Dolding <oiaohm at gmail.com>:
[...]
> One thing Yfrwlf did not say is that Zero install and Klik were put
> forward as possible packaging models for the LSB.   Major reason why
> they are not yet is lack of formal way to register there files in the
> packaging system.  Yes either one could be the formal package format
> of LSB in time.

Distributions can register their packages as dependencies for Zero
Install packages:

http://0install.net/distribution-integration.html

(going the other way doesn't make sense, I think)

As far as I'm aware, the main problem is that the ISVs on this list
don't have enough effort to test and report on the suitability of the
proposed systems, and instead plan to wait for the LSB to decide on an
official solution first (which they won't do without feedback from
ISVs). Perhaps someone has some funding available for this?

Apart from that, the issues were (IIRC):

- The need to bundle dependencies for off-line use and archiving. See
http://0install.net/0export.html. This is used by YoFrankie, for
example: http://www.yofrankie.org/. This works, but the user interface
could do with some improvements and better distribution integration.

- Performance issues with low-level tools (e.g. using Zero Install to
run bash) where the overhead of starting a Python process is
unacceptable. I have to plans to do anything about that at present.

- Mirrors for reliability. This is now done for feeds: see
http://roscidus.com/0mirror/

Please let me know if I've missed anything, of if anyone is waiting
for something.


-- 
Dr Thomas Leonard		ROX desktop / Zero Install
GPG: 9242 9807 C985 3C07 44A6  8B9A AE07 8280 59A5 3CC1