-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Rod Whitby schreef: | Paul Sokolovsky wrote: |> But if we don't invite people to cooperate on one well-maintained |> repo, we push them to setup their own feeds and organize feed |> graveyards like http://handhelds.org/moin/moin.cgi/IpkgFeeds | | I must disagree with this statement. As a real counter-example, the | NSLU2-Linux project has tens of thousands of users, and they *all* use | packages from official feeds built by a single autobuilder. There are | no unofficial feeds that we know of, and there are no binary uploads, by | anyone, ever.
I also think it's because different device types have different cultures and experiences: * The openslug users have a distro that is quite up to date and a devteam that is pretty responsive with adding new packages. After a certain point the feeds are 'saturated', i.e. have all the packages 90% of the users want * The zaurus users either come from a non-maintained binary only firmware hell where everyone puts a few packages to scratch their itch on their personal webservers without a coordinated effort or come from non-maintained opensource firmwares where there the official feeds only have what's in the rootfs (e.g. pdaX). * The ipaq users had their release feeds and the unstable feeds that haven't been updated in a while and currently with no developers to add requests. I have seen a number of people on irc asking 'which feed must I add for <foo>', where <foo> is a package that is present in the preconfigured feeds (e.g abiword). When you show them it's in the preconfigured feeds they usually say something like "Wow, that's neat. I come from <dead distro> that needed a gazillion extra feeds". That shows how deeply conditioned various groups of users are. I think we should have a good look on how the nslu2-linux project handles things and if possible improve on that. I think being responsive to requests is the biggest part of keeping people to use our feeds. Sometimes we have to say "no" to requests (openoffice for wrt routers), but that's life. | The key points to achieving this are: | | 1) If source code is not accessible in a public repository, then it | effectively does not exist. | | 2) If a binary cannot be built automatically using publicly available | build scripts by any third-party from publicly available source | repositories, then it cannot be released. and 3) QA checks We don't want packages that put a load of config files in $HOME, touch files owned by other packages (netbase vs iana-etc problems a while ago), have bad packaging, have the wrong architecture etc. regards, Koen - -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] will go go away in december 2007, please use [EMAIL PROTECTED] instead. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) iD8DBQFHf4hnMkyGM64RGpERAr6CAKCqYvGrzSyfirNv//kUwqsKx2KvdwCdGHkt N6VeA2wDSBNu7kwv0TYhLdY= =QPLY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Angstrom-distro-devel mailing list Angstrom-distro-devel@linuxtogo.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/angstrom-distro-devel
