On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 7:52 AM, John Burwell <john.burw...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
> All, > ... > In my opinion, favoring one 3rd-party repository over another is > detrimental to the community. agree > We should either list all maintained 3rd-party package repositories or > we should list none at all. By maintained, I mean a repository that meets > the following criteria: > > > * All contained packages are built from project release tags > I do not think it will be helpful to limit our listing to providers meeting this criteria; If anyone wants to distribute enhancements on the projects deliverables and share them as packages, that's fine. > * The packages contained in the repository are up-to-date with latest > release tags > That will be hard to enforce, we will have to make sure all providers are up to date ahead of time. > Some on the PR discussion asked about the purpose and composition of the > packages in the ShapeBlue repository. The packages in the ShapeBlue > repository are noredist builds of community release tags. They contain no > additional patches or changes. This repository was created to provide > users with an convenient/familiar way to install the noredist build of a > release. > I don't know what has trumpted this ShapeBlue bashing nor what has made ShapeBlue decide to provide packages in a way that was already custom at apt-get.eu, neither are a good sign. Finally, as I have stated elsewhere, I think the project should build > distribution packages signed by the project and distributed from official > package repositories. However, we must come to a consensus as community > this change in deliverables and work out a variety of issues (e.g. > supported platforms, repository management, signing, etc) to ensure that > users receive well-tested, community voted packages. Finally, it seems > like there will be a role for 3rd-party repositories now and in the > future. Listing all available 3rd-party repos as I propose would be > convenient for users, and ensure fairness to all contributors. > :+1: Your statement sounds like a proposal. It is inteded so? -- Daan
