On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 04:51:44PM +0800, Jesse Zhang wrote: > packagekit+conary is a good idea too. But given the oncoming change to > conary (system model etc), it may not fit for a three-month work for a > student, esp. if he's not already familiar with conary or packagekit.
well, most of the students will not be familiar with most of the projects offered through GSOC. getting new people into the community is one of the goals, so i am not concerned about that. > If packagekit was already working and the idea was to port it to system > model, that would be a nice project. But unfortunately packagekit/conary > is badly broken atm. i don't think it is as badly broken as you say. it was actually mostly working. the problem is that it rewrites a lot of things it should not rewrite but just let conary do. there is no point to fix packagekit and then port it to system-model, because even from a working packagekit the port to system-model would require a rewrite. so this does not matter. one thing that is a concern for GSOC is our mentoring capability, and our weight in the free software community. greetings, martin. -- cooperative communication with sTeam - caudium, pike, roxen and unix services: debugging, programming, training, linux sysadmin, web development -- pike programmer working in china community.gotpike.org foresight developer (open-steam|caudium).org foresightlinux.org unix sysadmin iaeste.at realss.com Martin Bähr http://www.iaeste.at/~mbaehr/ is.schon.org _______________________________________________ Foresight-devel mailing list Foresight-devel@lists.rpath.org http://lists.rpath.org/mailman/listinfo/foresight-devel
