Re: PPAs (Re: [Idea] Debian User Repository? (Not simply mimicing AUR))
Hi,
The proposed idea is source-only-based, and is totally different
from PPA (source+binary-based). I'm a PPA user and I don't have
any reason to re-invent yet another PPA.
The proposed idea is to take some advantages from source-based
software distribution tools. Examples are available here:
https://github.com/dupr/duprkit
https://github.com/dupr/DefaultCollection
Only "packaging scripts" are provided. Upstream source are
downloaded by the scritps locally before the build. The proposed
idea will never involve "distributing resulting binary .deb packages".
Again, the idea is totally different from PPA.
On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 10:32:46AM +0000, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 10:18:39AM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> > > At the first glance I interpreted the sentence as
> > > "This will only lead to flamewars"
> > > due to the meaning of bikeshed[1].
> > >
> > > However, I got a hint from a fellow developer and learned that
> > > "Bikeshed" has its own meaning under Debian's context, according
> > > to some old mailing list fragments[2][3] -- which refers to a
> > > dak feature (This is the first time I heard of such thing).
> > This supports my (thus far) private feeling that naming this initiative
> > "Bikeshed" is a bad idea.
>
> +1
>
> I also think that using the name "D**ian" is a bad idea.
>
> Just call it PPAs... millions of people know that term.
Reply to: