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

Re: Standardization, large scale changes, innovations


        I think this discussion is beginning to veer off topic, since it
 is far from figuring out who to vote for, etc. This is my last post on
 ths topic here, if you want to covince me of the error of my ways,
 please take it to private email. If you want to change how we do things
 to prevent me from doing what I have been doing, please take your pick
 -f -devel, -policy, or -ctte.

        I also apologize in advance for this email.

On Thu, Apr 01 2010, Frank Lin PIAT wrote:

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_Invented_Here  <-- replace "here" by ${me}
> There isn't just Manoj that work on Manoj's packages (QA team, Security
> team, Derivative distro... and our users!). BTW, does Manoj own those
> package?. As I wrote those lines, I wonder if some developer don't
> precisely use home made stuff to say "keep out, this is my own package".

        I posit that if you can't figure out my build system, you can't
 be very effective about making changes to the package (which is usually
 far more complex than my little make files).

> A best practice isn't a standard (or a policy), still most people follow
> it.

        In your opinion, does best equate with popular?

>> The major exception to this right now is that Policy assumes dpkg and the
>> core dpkg tools
> By standardizing more tools, we would be more efficient.

        By that definition, should we not all be working on Windows?
 Much more standard than Linux, neh?

> What about Debian users who need to modify a package for special needs?

        I think if they can modify the software for their needs, they
 can modify the build system too. I think my stuff is easier to modify
 and propagate than trying to modify debhelper and being able to
 distribute the result and having it build on your friends computer
 (they need the modified debhelper as well as your modified package, and
 that might mess up other package builds for them)

> What about peer review of the packages?

        My *peers* have no problems dealing with the build system, IMO.

> What about other teams in Debian? (nmu, porters...)

        I have been packaging for Debian for 15 years now. I don't
 recall a concrete  instance where this has been an issue.

> What about derivatives?

        I have heard complaints here, yes, about SELinux packages.  I
 think the issue was resolved.

> What about upstream review of his packages? (there isn't just
> patches).

        Most upstreams, if they don't use Debian, do not know about
 debhelper. At least my packages try to be self contained, and most
 upstreams know Make. I think I win this one.

baz bat bamus batis bant. James Troup
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>  
4096R/C5779A1C E37E 5EC5 2A01 DA25 AD20  05B6 CF48 9438 C577 9A1C

Reply to: