[packaging] Meeting next week to discuss trusted third-party repositories
Yfrwlf
swiftpaw22 at gmail.com
Wed Dec 10 21:41:29 PST 2008
> ISV's have many issues.
>
>
>
Those issues are also everyone's, since it effects everyone including
all developers and users, not just businesses. Everyone wants to see
them fixed. :)
> LSB has tried for years to get Distributions to sit down and solve
> this problem. Berlin Packaging API is simply LSB washing there hands
> of the complete problem and saying to ISV's use what ever you like
> there is the interface. If distributions end up with a uncontrolled
> mess that is there problem. Distributions have had 7 years to
> address the problem just from infighting they have not.
>
>
It's a much better solution than no solution at all! But you're right
that it's more of a patch job than truly fixing the problem, that put me
off it a little at first, but if it's all we have we'll have to make
due. Ultimately it would be very nice to see the same kind of rally cry
for at least one open packaging format/system which existed for other
things (ODF, Firefox, W3C web standards, etc). Maybe ISVs will just
have to start supporting only the Linux package managers and
corresponding "distros" which have adopted compatibility with some
packaging format until the pressure drives the bigger distro companies
to also adopt it. Could even somehow release patches for adding on that
feature to the package manager in those distros perhaps, until they
adopt it themselves. Hell, they could ship the patched versions of the
Linux OS with the box if it was for an ISV's store release, or offer the
OS on their site, though I know that would be a harder sell, at first at
least. Imagine Linux coming with the software you bought in a store
though...maybe Microsoft calling it a virus *was* accurate as that might
really help it grow fast. :)
> Now question why is YoFankie using a non LSB and non Distribution
> solution. Simple fact the distribution solutions don't work good
> enough for ISV's.
>
> Now there are things the Distribution needs like Secuirty ISV's also
> want to only have to do that once. 0install does have its flaws as
> well.
>
> Basically if Distributions don't do something soon we could have an
> Linux virus plague. Stacks of defective applications installed
> without the required security around them nice cause of a failure.
> Do ISV's care about this no they don't they have that with windows
> now.
>
> As I say Users ISV's and Distributions needs must be covered. Users
> are simple they just want to be able to install the applications they
> need and have stability and security.
>
> The complete idea of Linux being a secure platform is in danger if
> Distributions don't act. Current models put forward by Distributions
> don't suit ISV's or Users very well.
>
> Peter Dolding
>
But like Windows, users will use it any way if it means having access to
the programs they want. Perhaps that will further convince the distro
companies to give it up and adopt a format which has that security and
such that users want, *plus* freedom, by finally delivering an
API/framework/system/whatever that allows everyone to successfully
"communicate" to get done what everyone wants.
Linux packaging is like a bad relationship. All it takes to make things
better is some communication and cooperation long enough to build a
bridge with which communication and cooperation can occur. The problem
is getting it to happen the first time without everyone getting up and
leaving.
-Yfrwlf
More information about the packaging
mailing list