Raphael Hertzog dijo [Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 04:11:29PM +0100]: > Hello everybody, > > the fact that I had to request the removal of dolibarr from Debian makes > me sad (see below for the reasons) and I believe that we should be able > to do better to provide complex applications to our end users. > (...) > I'm sure we are missing lots of good applications due to our requirements. > What can we do to avoid this? > > I don't have any definite answers although there are ideas to explore: > (...) > What do you think? Do you have other ideas? Are there other persons > who are annoyed by the current situation?
I was bitten by a similar issue; I maintained Drupal 7 for several years (was included in 3 stable releases). But I gave up when packaging Drupal 8, much for the same reasons: http://gwolf.org/node/4087 However it saddens me, that's... Well, the right thing to do, IMO. > - we could relax our requirements and have a way to document the > limitations of those packages (wrt our usual policies) > > - we could ship those applications not as .deb but as container > and let them have their own lifecycle I would not like us relaxing our requirements. If there is a need to distribute webapps as container images, that can be done, and much probably it can be done by ourselves - But that's not Debian. That means, distributing a container with dolibarr or with drupal8 will not allow us to build packages that depend on them (such as drupal7-mod-civicrm), or packaging helpers (such as dh-make-drupal). Maybe few webapps introduce full ecosystems as Drupal does; we had a similar issue a couple of years ago with OwnCloud, and it would fall in the same case. And I think examples will be too many to list.