Re: Q: top three things you would like to change if that was easy?
Hi David
On 2019/04/02 17:24, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 08:15:39PM +0200, Jonathan Carter wrote:
>> 3. Make APT more competitive
>
> mmdebstrap (a debootstrap alternative) is a lovely example of putting
> APT into a field it wasn't initially created for and run with it: Now,
> wrap a GUI around it, make it bootstrap a chroot in your user space,
> install mc and drop some shellscript into ~/bin to add it to your path.
> Done. Mostly. Sort-of.
>
> So, assuming we accept this as a prototype, lets assume we want to have
> APT enter this field proper: there is a bunch of stuff to do, but
> thankfully (or sadly) most of it is outside the scope of APT and
> involves all of Debian (and to a point upstreams) in many rather
> technical battlefields potentially out of scope for the DPL, but there
> is one thing which while we have rough consensus in Debian that
> something should be done, there is no concerted directed effort, so we
> might benefit from the DPL driving the thing. I am talking of course
> about …
>
> The abolishment¹ of maintainer scripts in deb packages
>
>
> I took the liberty to ghost write you a little speech for the occasion,
> feel free (any of you) to use if you see fit:
>
> "We choose to abolish maintainerscript in this decade and do the other
> things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because
> that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies
> and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept,
> one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win"
> (similarities with other bold speeches is pure happenstance of course)
>
>
> The benefits are too plentiful to be fully enumerated, but beside this
> apt-home thing you can use it e.g. in (cross)bootstrapping, better and
> easier testing and packaging itself becomes easier as well!
>
>
> (While that mail was written yesterday, I feared people would get the
> idea I would be joking. I am not, well, except the speech part).
>
> Moo,
>
> David Kalnischkies
>
> ¹ with an exception for the 1% of packages which actually really need it
> and are deploying DPKG_ROOT at least. The rest should really make due
> with declarations of what it needs rather than buggy imperative scripts.
+1 to all of the above and I'll be happy to help you push for that
regardless of the outcome of this DPL election.
-Jonathan
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) <jcc>
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer - https://wiki.debian.org/highvoltage
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋ https://debian.org | https://jonathancarter.org
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ Be Bold. Be brave. Debian has got your back.
Reply to: