On Fri, 2007-08-17 at 12:23 +0300, Lauri Leukkunen wrote:
> On 17/08/07 11:37 +0300, ext Ed Bartosh wrote:
> > BTW, Debian and other linux distributions proved central repository
> > concept long time ago. I have no idea why we didn't follow it from the
> > start, but re-invented Windows-like one-c
"ext Daniel Stone" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> My assertion -- and I take this is axiomatic -- is that every change we
> have to make that can be trivially eliminated, should.
Yeah, but we can debate what is trivial and what is not... :)
For example, I did the wrong thing again when making pac
On Fri, 2007-08-17 at 12:02 +0300, Quim Gil wrote:
> Install files have nothing to do with repositories, they solve different
> problems.
Are you sure? I still think that AM adds repositories from .install
files to its configuration.
> Easy although potentially messy install files vs efficient
>
"ext Daniel Stone" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2007 at 11:37:18AM +0300, ext Ed Bartosh wrote:
>> BTW, Debian and other linux distributions proved central repository
>> concept long time ago. I have no idea why we didn't follow it from the
>> start, but re-invented Windows-like o
Ed Bartosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> BTW, Debian and other linux distributions proved central repository
> concept long time ago. I have no idea why we didn't follow it from
> the start, but re-invented Windows-like one-click installations
> instead.
Yeah, the fact that .install files can add
On 17/08/07 11:37 +0300, ext Ed Bartosh wrote:
> BTW, Debian and other linux distributions proved central repository
> concept long time ago. I have no idea why we didn't follow it from the
> start, but re-invented Windows-like one-click installations instead.
I remember. We were supposed to shave
Install files have nothing to do with repositories, they solve different
problems. Easy although potentially messy install files vs efficient
although potentially harder to use APT tools might have to have a
relation between mainstream vs cult.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a happy Synaptic user in my d
On Fri, Aug 17, 2007 at 11:37:18AM +0300, ext Ed Bartosh wrote:
> BTW, Debian and other linux distributions proved central repository
> concept long time ago. I have no idea why we didn't follow it from the
> start, but re-invented Windows-like one-click installations instead.
Well, given that non
On Fri, 2007-08-17 at 08:58 +0300, Quim Gil wrote:
> The install files don't bring any mess, they just make the mess more
> transparent and accessible. Don't kill the messenger, though. Instead,
> fix the mess.
I didn't say that. I said that they're hiding the mess, which is bad
thing from my point
The install files don't bring any mess, they just make the mess more
transparent and accessible. Don't kill the messenger, though. Instead,
fix the mess.
If the extras repositories is going to have some kind of community
quality assurance we can show an icon "community supported" or something
next
On Thu, 2007-08-16 at 16:50 +0300, Marius Vollmer wrote:
> Ed Bartosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> I'd say the .install files have worked very well. On the other hand,
> >> the profusion of category buttons in Application Manager is a very
> >> perceptible problem.
> >
> > I'd say that .in
Ed Bartosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I'd say the .install files have worked very well. On the other hand,
>> the profusion of category buttons in Application Manager is a very
>> perceptible problem.
>
> I'd say that .install files bring more problems than they solve. They're
> hiding real
On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 23:25 +0100, ext Neil Jerram wrote:
> Marius Vollmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Rather, I would hope that we get the repository mess under control by
> > having a few well maintained official repositories and then clean up
> > the category mess by tightly controlling t
"ext Neil Jerram" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [...] For installed applications, it seems to me that
> either way the user will have to do an update, either of the installed
> applications, or of Application Manager itself (post-Chinook).
Categories don't matter much for installed packages. Onl
On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 07:12:13PM +0300, Ed Bartosh wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 18:59 +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 06:55:54PM +0300, ext Ed Bartosh wrote:
> > > Thank you for the info, will look at it.
> > > Does it mean that we have to install sid if we want to use th
Marius Vollmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It is better to have the control point at the repository than in the
> devices. If we change our minds (and introduce a new category, e.g.),
> we don't need to update all the devices, we can just implement the
> change in the repository.
OK, good poin
"ext Daniel Stone" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It's not about having an instant 100% solution that magically fixes
> every package, but means that any package imported from Debian in
> future doesn't have to be forked, which seems like a win to me.
Yep. Although I am a bit wary about _replacin
"ext Ed Bartosh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> We already have a lot of this kind of packages. All user packages
> have to have 'User/something' in their debian/control in order to be
> installable with AM.
Just to counter more rumours concerning why you might want to put your
package into the "u
On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 18:59 +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 06:55:54PM +0300, ext Ed Bartosh wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 17:24 +0300, ext Guillem Jover wrote:
> > > For the Section:s stuff, as I've said few times on this thread, you
> > > just need to add override files (c
On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 06:55:54PM +0300, ext Ed Bartosh wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 17:24 +0300, ext Guillem Jover wrote:
> > For the Section:s stuff, as I've said few times on this thread, you
> > just need to add override files (check the man pages for deb-override,
> > dpkg-scanpackages and/
On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 17:24 +0300, ext Guillem Jover wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 19:00:44 +0300, Ed Bartosh wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 02:01 +0100, Neil MacLeod wrote:
> > > Marius Vollmer wrote:
> > > > Neil MacLeod writes:
> > > > > Perhaps if someone can identify the method currently be
"ext Guillem Jover" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > role::program && interface::x11 && \
>> > (uitoolkit::hildon || uitoolkit::gtk || uitoolkit::sdl ||
>> > uitoolkit::xlib)
>>
>> Right, that makes a lot of sense. But still, it is a rather indirect
>> way of controlling visibility in the AM
On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 19:00:44 +0300, Ed Bartosh wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 02:01 +0100, Neil MacLeod wrote:
> > Marius Vollmer wrote:
> > > Neil MacLeod writes:
> > > > Perhaps if someone can identify the method currently being used by
> > > > the Application Manager to group applications it c
"ext Neil Jerram" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Marius Vollmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Rather, I would hope that we get the repository mess under control by
>> having a few well maintained official repositories and then clean up
>> the category mess by tightly controlling the categories o
Marius Vollmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Rather, I would hope that we get the repository mess under control by
> having a few well maintained official repositories and then clean up
> the category mess by tightly controlling the categories of the
> packages in the official repositories.
What
On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 02:01 +0100, ext Neil MacLeod wrote:
> Marius Vollmer wrote:
> > "ext Neil MacLeod" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> Perhaps if someone can identify the method currently being used by
> >> the Application Manager to group applications it can cut down on the
> >> guesswork
On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 18:00:37 +0300, Marius Vollmer wrote:
> Guillem Jover" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I disagree. You'd be using tags to filter what you show. Probably
> > we'd iwant a new tag like uitoolkit::hildon, but that's not maemo
> > specific, and it's not needed to start using them
"ext Guillem Jover" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 16:03:13 +0300, Marius Vollmer wrote:
>
>> Using tags instead of the section is just another implementation of
>> the same feature. Had I used tags, we still would have to have a
>> special maemo specific tag that controls vi
On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 16:03:13 +0300, Marius Vollmer wrote:
> Guillem Jover" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Right, currently it's using the Section, but personally I think that's
> > a mistake, which I've told Marius several times, the proper solution is
> > using tags.
>
> Using tags instead of t
"ext Guillem Jover" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 2007-08-13 at 17:17:41 +0100, Neil MacLeod wrote:
>> Guillem Jover wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2007-08-13 at 15:32:01 +0300, Eero Tamminen wrote:
>> > There's no cli section in Debian. But anyway, what you did is incorrect,
>> > as the Section from
On Mon, 2007-08-13 at 17:17:41 +0100, Neil MacLeod wrote:
> Guillem Jover wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-08-13 at 15:32:01 +0300, Eero Tamminen wrote:
> > There's no cli section in Debian. But anyway, what you did is incorrect,
> > as the Section from the '.deb' packages is not the authoritative
> > sourc
"ext Neil Jerram" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Paul Klapperich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Perhaps the application manager could require one of those
>> categories is used or it shows up "Not Installable" just as occurs
>> when the package is not in the user category?
>
> Or the package in
"Paul Klapperich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Perhaps the application manager could require one of those categories is used
> or it shows up "Not Installable" just as occurs when the package is not in the
> user category?
Or the package installs, but then shows up under an "Unclassified"
catego
On 8/13/07, Neil MacLeod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Marius Vollmer wrote:
> > "ext Neil MacLeod" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> Perhaps if someone can identify the method currently being used by
> >> the Application Manager to group applications it can cut down on the
> >> guesswork, and
Marius Vollmer wrote:
> "ext Neil MacLeod" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Perhaps if someone can identify the method currently being used by
>> the Application Manager to group applications it can cut down on the
>> guesswork, and give us a base from which to move forward.
>
> http://hildon-app
"ext Neil MacLeod" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Perhaps if someone can identify the method currently being used by
> the Application Manager to group applications it can cut down on the
> guesswork, and give us a base from which to move forward.
http://hildon-app-mgr.garage.maemo.org/packaging.h
Guillem Jover wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 2007-08-13 at 15:32:01 +0300, Eero Tamminen wrote:
>
> There's no cli section in Debian. But anyway, what you did is incorrect,
> as the Section from the '.deb' packages is not the authoritative
> source. The Section:s are overriden on the archive, so you sh
Hi,
On Mon, 2007-08-13 at 15:32:01 +0300, Eero Tamminen wrote:
> Neil MacLeod wrote:
> > Having downloaded a handful of debs and viewed the info with "dpkg --info
> > "
> > it's clear that by "category" I mean "Section", eg. ncurses-bin appears in
> > the category "cli" within Application Manager
Hi,
On Mon, 2007-08-13 at 10:31:23 +0300, ext Eero Tamminen wrote:
> Neil MacLeod wrote:
> > Ferenc Szekely wrote:
> > > Neil raised a very important point in his mail: categories and control
> > > of the repository. We could experiment with the categories in this
> > > "extras-testing" repository
Hi,
ext Neil MacLeod wrote:
> Having downloaded a handful of debs and viewed the info with "dpkg --info
> "
> it's clear that by "category" I mean "Section", eg. ncurses-bin appears in
> the category "cli" within Application Manager while the deb has a "Section"
> value set to "user/cli".
>
> I'
Eero Tamminen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could you first define what you mean by "category"?
>
> I have a bug in Bugzilla about the terminology, and it's not very clear:
> https://bugs.maemo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1524
>
> This is the relevant part in Debian Policy:
> http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-pol
Hi,
ext Neil MacLeod wrote:
> Ferenc Szekely wrote:
>> On 8/9/07, Vlad Vasiliev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Neil raised a very important point in his mail: categories and control
>> of the repository. We could experiment with the categories in this
>> "extras-testing" repository. First we would
42 matches
Mail list logo
