My opinion concurs with that of Alan: In common with most GNU programs, the "official" releases are the tarballs on ftp.gnu.org
This is partly for pragmatic reasons and partly a matter of GNU policy. See https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html#Managing-Releases If however somebody wishes to make and maintain "flatpak" package we will gladly link to it from http://gnu.org/s/pspp/get.html BTW, If you are looking for a container like system which provides sandboxing, isolation and high security, and the possibility of multiple versions concurrently, then I think you can't do much better than Guix. PSPP is already "packaged" as a Guix application, and can either be installed as a package manager over an existing operating system, or as a complete operating system in its own right. http://gnu.org/s/guix J' On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 02:14:21AM +0000, Charles Johnson wrote: >The place to discuss this with developers is pspp-dev. Thank you Alan... I know, however, this discussion is for PSPP and GNU/Linux users that usually installed PSPP and visualize the problems they have had in time. >The PSPP devs can speak for themselves, but I think that they would/will say that packaging PSPP is now what >they do.? So, if you or someone else wanted to package PSPP using flagpak, I think they would welcome that >and support it by answering questions.? But the only official release PSPP makes is to drop a source tarball onto >the GNU FTP server. Of course, that's the best present system and results in additional work they have to perform some volunteers to keep these packages in some distributions. The idea is that if a new packaging system takes into account this problem would be partially solved. I do not pretend a sudden change, but it can be a very effective alternative to distribute PSPP in GNU/Linux. >Regarding flatpak, I'm not familiar with it, but it looks like a container system. Is that right?? What specific >problem would flatpak solve that is plaguing PSPP? Flatpack looks like a container, but it is not. See: http://flatpak.org/faq.html#Is_Flatpak_a_container_technology_ As the authors say, Flatpack is more related to sandboxed applications. In addition to the consequences of having an isolated application of the system, this would reduce the minimum installation requirements (dependencies in general) would be distributed as a whole, ensuring greater control. This would allow new and stable use more libraries that would solve problems (eg. GTK + to use a new widget), upgrades that would benefit all users to be more direct, easy installation by the user, etc. Of course, not everything is positive, since for example increase the weight of the installation package among other things, but brings more benefits. CJT _______________________________________________ Pspp-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pspp-users -- Avoid eavesdropping. Send strong encryted email. PGP Public key ID: 1024D/2DE827B3 fingerprint = 8797 A26D 0854 2EAB 0285 A290 8A67 719C 2DE8 27B3 See http://sks-keyservers.net or any PGP keyserver for public key.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ pspp-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pspp-dev
