[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bringing Mobian closer to Debian



Hi,

==========

TL;DR: We plan to import some of the Mobian packages (generic and
device-specific tweaks) in the Debian archive; this mail's purpose is to
start a more thorough discussion than what is possible on IRC/Matrix,
and collect feedback and advice about the way to go.

==========

As you may already know, Mobian[1] is a Debian derivative offering
ready-to-use Debian-based images for mobile devices. We currently
support the Pine64 PinePhone & PineTab, Purism Librem 5, Microsoft
Surface Pro and provide experimental support for OnePlus 6/6T and the
Pocophone F1.

We use packages straight from the Debian archive as much as possible,
but also maintain a small number of packages[2] for various reasons:
1. packages already in Debian with a few additional patches for
   improving the user experience on mobile devices (mostly GNOME apps
   such as evince, gedit or gnome-contacts)
2. kernel and bootloader packages including out-of-tree patches
3. non-free binary firmwares
4. Mobian base metapackages (meta-mobian) and customizations
   (mobian-tweaks) [4]
5. device-specific metapackages ($device-support) and customizations
   (mobian-$device-tweaks) [5]

Most of the Mobian developers are also members of the DebianOnMobile
team[3], and we hope to contribute even more to Debian now that bullseye
is being released. In order to achieve this goal, we plan on bringing
packages from the above items #4 and #5 to the Debian archive
(preferably in the 'main' area), and are considering several ways of
doing so:

a. merge all device-specific metapackages and tweaks into a single
   (or maybe 2) source package, making it easier to maintain and improve
  * option 1: have a single binary package per device, replacing both
              the current $device-support and mobian-$device-tweaks
  * option 2: keep generating separate metapackages and customizations,
              as we currently do in Mobian

"option 1" makes the dependency chain a bit shorter, is relatively
straighforward, but it comes with a trade-off: almost all packages would
depend on packages outside the Debian archives (custom kernels) and/or
non-free packages, meaning they should go into 'contrib'.

"option 2" adds a dependency level and minimal complexity, but it would
allow us to have (nearly) all mobian-$device-tweaks packages in 'main'
and upload only device metapackages to 'contrib'.

b. add Mobian generic customizations (initramfs scripts and hooks,
   systemd config files, among other things) to the source package
   holding all device-specific tweaks

This would ease maintenance but is not necessarily the most logical
approach IMHO. One important thing to consider is that, while we could
live with device-specific packages in 'contrib', we would really prefer
to have both meta-mobian and mobian-tweaks into 'main'.

c. merge all of the above into the existing "mobile-tweaks" source
   package [6]

As DebianOnMobile maintainers, we agreed a while ago that mobile-tweaks
would mostly hold cosmetic tweaks, and not be used to significantly
alter the system behavior. Almost a year down the road, do we want to
keep it that way? Or can we drop all mobian-$device-tweaks packages and
add features to the existing $device-tweaks ones?

FYI, this question was raised when I filed an ITP for mobian-tweaks[7],
although my answer would probably be different today.

==========

So basically, here's the global picture, and we'd very much like to
read your thoughts on that matter.

Thanks,
The Mobian team

---

[1] https://mobian-project.org/
[2] https://packages.mobian-project.org/
[3] https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DebianOnMobile
[4] https://salsa.debian.org/Mobian-team/
[5] https://gitlab.com/mobian1/devices
[6] https://salsa.debian.org/DebianOnMobile-team/mobile-tweaks
[7] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=974422#10

Attachment: OpenPGP_0xD3EBB5966BB99196.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: