El 02/10/2013 20:23, "Cédric Krier" <[email protected]> va escriure: > > On 02/10/13 19:50 +0200, Guillem Barba Domingo wrote: > > El 02/10/2013 16:05, "Cédric Krier" <[email protected]> va escriure: > > > > > > On 02/10/13 06:46 -0700, Axel Braun wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Am Dienstag, 1. Oktober 2013 18:39:08 UTC+2 schrieb Cédric Krier: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > URL: http://codereview.tryton.org/1110002/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My concern is that it is a personal package and not an official > > openSUSE > > > > > (if I understand correctly). I would prefer (as I don't have any > > > > > knowledge in openSUSE package) that we link only packages managed by > > the > > > > > official workflow of the distribution. > > > > > > > > > > The build service offers users the ability to build packages for > > various > > > > platforms (Fedora, Red Hat, Cent OS, Ubuntu, Debian,..) from a single > > > > source. openSUSE as distribution bases completely on packages from the > > > > build service. > > > > > > We are not really concern, packages already exist for Fedora (and I > > > guess derivates), Ubuntu and Debian > > > > I think it's good to have packages of Tryton, specially it they are updated. > > The webpage could have two lists of packages: officials and personals, and > > each one with the list of available versions. > > Personals packages are against all the rules of good practice. > Moreover, *I don't want to manage such volatile list*.
You don't need. Other people from the community, like Axel with this parch, will maage it. > > Cedk, you talk about the official workflow of distribution, but sometimes > > it's bad. > > Not bad but doesn't match your need. So it is this just mean that the > distribution is not for you. Or it's perfect to me for the 95% of cases and I accept manage some "exceptions" out of the "official way of distribution". Debian (and their children) have tools to manage different package repositories, event to manage priorities if the same package is in more thab one repository... So it supports personal/third party repositories (what I want to say is that it isn't out of the "official way" of distribution). > > For example, in Debian the packages are for a very old version of > > Tryton, so Debian and Ubuntu users will prefere a PPA with the latests > > stable versions. > > It is a very common situation for many products. > > Everyone is free but we don't have the ability to evaluate the quality > of packages. So we delegate to the distributions. Or you can delegate to other members of Tryton's community, or community can decide to have this list with a disclaimer about thw non-proved quality. > > In summary, I think that more packages (and all of them listed in Tryton's > > website) and more explicit information (officials/personal) is better for > > users. > > No, "more" is not often better. > Having such structure will make things much more complicate for the > visitor. Maybe. In this case I think that these packages are very valuable for.the newbie (who could try the latest stable version easier than installing python packages, what some newbies have problems). Guillem Barba
