On Monday 05 May 2008 12:42:33 Niels Breet wrote: > Do we need a separate extras repository for diablo or should we just add a > link to chinook?
I strongly believe they need to be separate. The main reason isn't from the point of view of Diablo, it is from the point of view of Chinook. The issue isn't whether chinook apps will work on diablo (and it is good news that they will) -- it is whether diablo apps will work on chinook! If there are *any* library changes (you mentioned libssl but I *really* hope there will be an up to date version of glib!) then apps built for Diablo will not work on Chinook. So, you have the problem that users still running chinook will find that apps in the chinook repository will not install! > By linking the two, developers don't have to upload their packages to both > repositories. But the autobuilder makes this irrelevant. Developers can submit the exact same source package to both autobuilders if they want to (the submission assistant can even do it automatically for you by default). And you can initially populate the diablo repository (even before anyone outside Nokia has a diablo device) just by running the autobuilder on all the source packages in the chinook repository (and, if you could automate sending any failures to the maintainer from the package that would be even better!). > What do you think? Please give us your ideas, pros/cons. The autobuilder makes this sort of decision very easy to decide -- always go for a separate repository for every change in the Nokia released firmware. As long as the Application manager on the device has enough information to automatically select the right one it is transparent to the user and the autobuilder can handle the issue for developers. In fact, the autobuilder actually makes it impossible to make a single repository work in the future: it becomes impossible for me to deliberately build my "diablo" software against chinook libraries or against old libraries of other community packages. For example, if library libAAA links against libssl then the autobuilder would insist on building a version which won't run on chinook (presumably Nokia does not allow a chinook package to upgrade libssl), but if I was building it myself I would build it against the chinook version so it could run on both. I do this today for gregale: the gregale version of GPE is deliberately built against the 3.0 SDK (not 3.2, where the "gregale" codename points). Graham _______________________________________________ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
