* Guillem Barba Domingo: " Re: [tryton-dev] www.tryton.org: message to commit" (Thu, 3 Oct 2013 08:56:11 +0200):
> 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. I agree. There is a big difference between packages backed by the distribution and packages from third parties. In the first case you trust the distribution, in the second case it is up to the user to decide about the quality resp. trust of the individual distributor. > 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). It is not only for newbies. Running productive environments you are much better when using the package management of the distribution. -- Mathias Behrle MBSolutions Gilgenmatten 10 A D-79114 Freiburg Tel: +49(761)471023 Fax: +49(761)4770816 http://m9s.biz UStIdNr: DE 142009020 PGP/GnuPG key availabable from any keyserver, ID: 0x8405BBF6
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
