Hi Mairas, On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Matti Airas <[email protected]> wrote: >> Another point is, with this raw packages, we can avoid people to do >> wrongs updates, only who really know what are doing will use our >> package. The main point of this is because we can't ensure if the >> package are 100% working, the build system is automatic then some >> problems can happen and then make the package invalid. >> >> In my opinion the best way is keep the things manually to avoid >> automatic mistakes ;). > > But not providing the repos will just make things more difficult for those > who would benefit of following the bleeding edge with minor harm to regular > users. After all, Debian and Ubuntu provide unstable repositories as well, > without any harm to the user. If you're interested in adding PySide > repositories to your computer, you're a developer anyway, and can be assumed > to understand the difference between nightly releases and stable ones.
Just throwing my own bits on this: I see the usefulness of these daily builds when you can quickly point out to some user the bug XYZ was fixed and he could easily test it (without needing to wait for a build on his/her machina). This could help validating bug fixes. I would go even further and instead of providing distro-dependent Debian packages, it could be provided a "self-contained", statically linked, binary tarball with: * Latest supported Python (e.g. 2.7.x) * Latest PySide snapshot (It can be assumed that the user has a minimum Qt 4.7.x version installed, adding it to the tarball would make it too big) It could be used the "freeze" scripts someone posted some time ago. This would allow distro-independent testing packages. My two cents, -- Anderson Lizardo Instituto Nokia de Tecnologia - INdT Manaus - Brazil _______________________________________________ PySide mailing list [email protected] http://lists.pyside.org/listinfo/pyside
