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

[Peter Dolding]

On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 5:26 PM, Dan Kegel <dank at kegel.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 11:21 PM, Peter Dolding <oiaohm at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Sorry you are proposing is in conflit with Berlin.  Proposing something
> that
> > Berlin exists to allow happen.   Using different repository formats.
> > Berlin allows that by ISV providing there own front end for there choosen
> > repository format.
>
> That's one more reason Berlin is uninteresting to me,
> it bypasses the system package manager and
> thus the update system.  As an ISV, I want to
> make my packages available via traditional
> Linux distribution methods; I don't want to reinvent the wheel.
>
> I'm also uninterested in metadiscussions, really.  I'd rather be
> solving real problems.  Can we get back to that, please?
> - Dan
>

That gets way more complex as soon as you introduce criteria of "shipping
everywhere".  If you want it part of LSB it has to pass that bit.  We don't
want to create new walls to distributions joining LSB.  Package kit alone
currently support 8 different distribution systems apt alpm box conary opkg
pisi poldek smart urpmi yum zypp.   Catch is there are more than just that.
There is not even consistancy between LSB supporting distributions.  Sorry
that is the way the cookie crumbles.   And just like RPM if LSB tried to
force them to use 1 we will lose distributions.

Berlin does not bypass the package manager completly.   Problem is with the
massively different distribution systems distributions use you will be
basically forced to do what Berlin does to cover the LSB supporting
distributions let alone everyone else.   Own independant engine for handling
updates to whatever distribution is using as there distribution system.
Virtually none of the currently existing distribution systems in use support
adding your own update engine for a non native distribution system for the
distribution by any other method than what Berlin is doing.  If distribution
systems supported adding you own update system berlin would have had that
feature.

You are snookered unless of course you can magically get distributions to
use the same distribution system.  Not going to happen.

LSB packaging worked that out 3 years ago.   Best you can hope for is
intergation into package kit and registration like berlin in distributions
managment system so you don't end up with overlaps.

This argument is not even a new one.    Why go berlin simple because it can
work.   Something more complex than berlin with better feature set would be
nice.

Peter Dolding
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/packaging/attachments/20081228/74d23840/attachment-0001.htm