Re: Please be verbose whether you would like to get your Blend promoted by tasksel
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 12:16 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > Quoting Felipe Sateler (2014-08-27 17:19:27) >> On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Andreas Tille wrote: >>> yesterday I joined the videostream of the installer BoF at >>> DebConf[1]. I also became a bit involved via IRC. Joey Hess raised >>> the question about the criteria to add a Blend or not. I answered >>> "all in the list of the bug report #758116" which IMHO fits the >>> criterion of "actively maintained and some valuable content for >>> users". >>> >>> I think it should be also a criterion that the team behind the Blend >>> confirms that they are interested and so I'm hereby pinging all lists >>> in question to ask you for confirmation. >> >> Do we want to pursue this? I think that if we could manage to provide >> useful blend packages it would be worth it, but so far I have failed >> to do so. I think maybe we need to rethink the approach and reduce the >> number of metapackages. Today we have too many. Maybe we should reduce >> them to 2: multimedia-codecs and multimedia-production. > > When this blend emerged I was surprised it only grouped by functionality > - I imagine few users need "8 ways to loop audio" or "7 drum machines", > and more need either "a rich drum-machine and rudimentary other tools > missing from that specific tool relevant for drum-oriented production" > or "a rich loop engine and rudimentary add-on tools missing from that > specific tool relevant for loop-oriented multimedia production". > > Each such "scenario"-oriented would have the potential to grow from > simple metapackage to also include choice of window manager and custom > tuning of that to optimize for the scenario, and suitable Gtk+ and Qt > skin, and some graphics that goes well with it. I.e. "spice" not > technically multimedia but part of a multimedia user experience. > > The games team has created metapackages grouped by gaming style, but > also done a few subjective selections. That I find inspiring. > > Perhaps leave all the current multimedia metapackages as-is, but add > additional subjective ones each composing an _environment_ for > consuming/producing multimedia. Yes, I think that would be very useful. However, it has become apparent that we cannot even maintain a list of all the multimedia packages, so I would not expect us to be able to maintain such an "opinionated" metapackage. It was raised on IRC by Paul Wise that we could invite the people from kxstudio and avlinux (the biggest multimedia-oriented downstreams) to help with packaging, and I think they could also help a lot in crafting multimedia blends. > Also consuming multimedia is IMO relevant to group like that: When using > KDE (and therefore libphonon) what is recommended players and codec > packages and whatever to use together? How about a lightweight (i.e. > non-GNOME and non-KDE) desktop - what do we recommend to use there? > > For the DebianParl blend (which uses Xfce desktop) I have experimented > with avoiding GStreamer framework altogether. That is possible - and is > quite lightweight. > > > Specifically your idea to create a multimedia-codecs: I think few user > really wants "all codecs in the FLOSS World" - that's merely the > desparate consequence of "all relevant FLOSS codecs installed and > properly registered" too often missing. Let's fix the real problem, not > encourage our users to bogusly reframe it. While in principle we could produce such packages (if we found the manpower to do so), I think that the complexity added by having multiple versions is counterproductive. Instructions found on the internet usually focus on the easy, not on the correct or space efficient. So I think in this case the perfect is indeed enemy of the good. -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Please be verbose whether you would like to get your Blend promoted by tasksel
Quoting Felipe Sateler (2014-08-27 17:19:27) > On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Andreas Tille wrote: >> yesterday I joined the videostream of the installer BoF at >> DebConf[1]. I also became a bit involved via IRC. Joey Hess raised >> the question about the criteria to add a Blend or not. I answered >> "all in the list of the bug report #758116" which IMHO fits the >> criterion of "actively maintained and some valuable content for >> users". >> >> I think it should be also a criterion that the team behind the Blend >> confirms that they are interested and so I'm hereby pinging all lists >> in question to ask you for confirmation. > > Do we want to pursue this? I think that if we could manage to provide > useful blend packages it would be worth it, but so far I have failed > to do so. I think maybe we need to rethink the approach and reduce the > number of metapackages. Today we have too many. Maybe we should reduce > them to 2: multimedia-codecs and multimedia-production. When this blend emerged I was surprised it only grouped by functionality - I imagine few users need "8 ways to loop audio" or "7 drum machines", and more need either "a rich drum-machine and rudimentary other tools missing from that specific tool relevant for drum-oriented production" or "a rich loop engine and rudimentary add-on tools missing from that specific tool relevant for loop-oriented multimedia production". Each such "scenario"-oriented would have the potential to grow from simple metapackage to also include choice of window manager and custom tuning of that to optimize for the scenario, and suitable Gtk+ and Qt skin, and some graphics that goes well with it. I.e. "spice" not technically multimedia but part of a multimedia user experience. The games team has created metapackages grouped by gaming style, but also done a few subjective selections. That I find inspiring. Perhaps leave all the current multimedia metapackages as-is, but add additional subjective ones each composing an _environment_ for consuming/producing multimedia. Also consuming multimedia is IMO relevant to group like that: When using KDE (and therefore libphonon) what is recommended players and codec packages and whatever to use together? How about a lightweight (i.e. non-GNOME and non-KDE) desktop - what do we recommend to use there? For the DebianParl blend (which uses Xfce desktop) I have experimented with avoiding GStreamer framework altogether. That is possible - and is quite lightweight. Specifically your idea to create a multimedia-codecs: I think few user really wants "all codecs in the FLOSS World" - that's merely the desparate consequence of "all relevant FLOSS codecs installed and properly registered" too often missing. Let's fix the real problem, not encourage our users to bogusly reframe it. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: signature ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Please be verbose whether you would like to get your Blend promoted by tasksel
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi, > > yesterday I joined the videostream of the installer BoF at DebConf[1]. > I also became a bit involved via IRC. Joey Hess raised the question > about the criteria to add a Blend or not. I answered "all in the list > of the bug report #758116" which IMHO fits the criterion of "actively > maintained and some valuable content for users". > > I think it should be also a criterion that the team behind the Blend > confirms that they are interested and so I'm hereby pinging all lists in > question to ask you for confirmation. Do we want to pursue this? I think that if we could manage to provide useful blend packages it would be worth it, but so far I have failed to do so. I think maybe we need to rethink the approach and reduce the number of metapackages. Today we have too many. Maybe we should reduce them to 2: multimedia-codecs and multimedia-production. The first would depend on all the codec-prividing packages, so that we can tell users: install this and every media file on the internets is playable. Today we might have some files not playable in some media players by default because (for example) the appropriate gstreamer-* was not installed or some other nonsense. Hopefully, the internets will fill up with "install multimedia-codecs" instead of "add deb-multimedia" instructions. The second should provide pretty much every multimedia production related application we have, plus ladspa and LV2 plugins. This is more likely to be more useful to add to tasksel than the first metapackage. Ideally this would make debian a competitor to kxstudio or avstudio. I think we have some way to go before we are at their level, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try. Ideally we could get them (the downstreams) to work with us and simply modify and package additional things we do not (or cannot) have in Debian. What do you think? This is the current git repo for the blend: http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-multimedia/multimedia-blends.git/ -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Please be verbose whether you would like to get your Blend promoted by tasksel
Hi, yesterday I joined the videostream of the installer BoF at DebConf[1]. I also became a bit involved via IRC. Joey Hess raised the question about the criteria to add a Blend or not. I answered "all in the list of the bug report #758116" which IMHO fits the criterion of "actively maintained and some valuable content for users". I think it should be also a criterion that the team behind the Blend confirms that they are interested and so I'm hereby pinging all lists in question to ask you for confirmation. I have set Reply-To to the bug report and the general Blends list in case you are interested in further discussion with other Blends. Any input is welcome to make sure users will realise the fruits of your great work at the earliest point in time. Kind regards Andreas. [1] https://summit.debconf.org/debconf14/meeting/44/debian-installer-and-cd-bof/ -- http://fam-tille.de ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
