But it is important to keep in mind the distributions' own release
policies. Many distributions do not allow non-security-related
updates over the course of a single release cycle. This allows them
to thoroughly test a given combination of software. Having the
distribution release one set of packages and having the foundation
release another set may be confusing to users and will may prove to be
a major annoyance to distributions which work hard to provide a
coherent set of packages.
I am not saying that such packages should not be released, my point is
merely that we need to be mindful of the needs and limitations of the
distribution maintainers, and not make life any more difficult for
them than is absolutely necessary. Just pushing out packages and
telling users to download them is not a good strategy, in fact it is a
really good way to turn distributions against you. More thought, and
a lot of discussion with those maintaining the distributions, will be
needed in order to guarantee a mutually beneficial approach. It may
not be possible to completely please every party, but unilaterally
bypassing the distributions entirely is not a good idea in my opinion.
-Todd
Yes, you are right. But in this case the service would be offered to
them and it would be up to the distros to either use it or not. Or the
user of that particular distro would then have the option of installing
it if wished.
This is what the KDE group offer. I got my updates to KDE4.5.0 from the
KDE site rather than wait for the Mandriva repos update, which of course
are on hold now. I just set up my package manager to point to the KDE
repos for Mandriva.
This method seems to work well for the KDE group.
Marc
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail to [email protected]
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
deleted.
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
