-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Guillaume Rousse wrote: > Ainsi parlait Buchan Milne : > >>Would you like to list examples of duplicate work?? >> >>I guess someone besides Danny has a working preempt kernel rpm (for >>example)? >> >>Unless there is a vast quantity of packages that have been duplicated, >>the whole argument is senseless at present. > > Duplicated is not the correct word, rather potentially duplicated. I'd never > checked in club before creating a quakeforge package, for example. >
If there was no club, you would have had to check 1)http://rpm.nyvalls.se/ 2)http://ranger.dnsalias.com/mandrake/mandrake9.0/ 3)http://ftp.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/distributions/contrib/texstar/ 4)http://www.rpmhelp.net/ 5)http://ftp.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/distributions/borg/Mandrake/9.0/RPMS And possibly more. Club currently reduces that list by at least one (replace club for mine and thac's rpms). > Check my originally submitted list, for me all packages listed as "club only" > should not be there until they are either in contrib (license allowing) or in > PLF (license problem) for cooker level. > Possibly 10 total packages. > And just because there is no duplicate currently doesn't means there won't > ever. > Sure, but that is more indicative of no current method for submitting packaging requests. If there were one place for packaging requests to go, it could have all the known/managed urpmi sources, and automatically suggest where to find packages. At present, this is still manual in club, but even more so on cooker (where you do get the odd query for a a package that is in plf for example). >> >>>contrib in cooker branch. This will force them to either forward their >>>request to contributers, or ask for a contributer status themselves. >> >>Huh? How does this help? Would you want to >>1)restrict RPMs to ever be created by the few that have contrib access > > Nothing prevent to give contrib access to more people, provided there is some > criteria for this. > So why are there not many more poeple requesting contrib access? There are a lot asking for Club upload access. > >>2)force contributors to follow cooker to find why their packages build >>at home but not on cooker? > > That's the whole problem of backporting. Short-circuiting avoid it, but > doesn't solve it. You mean forward-porting? But there are also other problems (backporting from cooker, such as now with no mklibname on 9.0, but in use in many packages in cooker). If the only two people who want to use it/package it run stable it is less work to have the packager package on stable, and only forward-port to cooker when the one who requested it is happy. The only thing we do not have now is all club contributors forward-porting to cooker. >> >>Oh, so I have read access to /incoming then ;-)? >> >>We have a Request For Package system (besides cooker - see thread on >>linecontrol, which was also instigated by Club ...) > > Don't misunderstand me: i think the club is wonderful for extending stable > release life, and also for user input. I also think a formal RFP system would > be great for cooker. And lastly, i think every *.mdk package currently > included in PLF archives would definitively be better in club. But it doesn't > make the club the best place for introducing new packages. I don't think that is necessarily feasible with current laws, which were the whole reason for PLF. And I don't think PLF will take all software that is in club. Is PLF not still meant to be free software (license-wise)? Not everything in Club (comm section) is. Anyway, it is obvious that Guillaume and Deno will not reconcile their opinions any time soon, so those who are involved on both sides will have to port (there is always work to do to port, even if packages are in cooker ... had some fixing to do with samba3 now ...) Regards, Buchan - -- |--------------Another happy Mandrake Club member--------------| Buchan Milne Mechanical Engineer, Network Manager Cellphone * Work +27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x121 Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering http://www.cae.co.za GPG Key http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc 1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE+ZOLIrJK6UGDSBKcRArOxAJ9F6dOUJ4mbSL9VlNjvUq6aLnXRCQCfdvN9 ewf1h74jTpHjRk8NMTkp/WE= =U0vo -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
