Hope this is the right place - recommendations - a one clickinstall package & standardize group "namespace"

[Gabriel Phoenix <gabrieltalks sympatico ca>]

On Sat, 2002-07-13 at 19:43, Gabriel wrote:
> I presume the developers are reading this and these two recommendations
> are directed mostly towards them.
> 
> Now if I have overlooked something simple, my apologies.
> 
> 
> 
> The first idea... basically a compressed packages of packages - a
> "one-click" install package.
> 
> The problem: I have lost count of the number of dependencies I have had
> to fulfill. You need a great deal of patience to try an install and have
> a dependency of a dependency of a dependency. A newbie and the general
> user would never have the patience to do this.
> 
> The solution: allow for a compressed package of rpm packages and some
> extra support (through scripts) for "what if" scenarios". The underlying
> database and checks would still work as is. The difference is that this
> one package would be uncompress and install the parts which are needed.
> Now if I had already upgraded package A or library B it would ignore
> those particular packages.
> 
> When I upgraded to KDE 3 in Mandrake I placed all the relevant binaries
> rpms in one directory and pointed the Mandrake installer to that
> directory. Almost a one click upgrade to KDE 3. My suggestion is to
> standardize that idea.
> 
> Using the above example, I would download *one* file, enter the command
> (easily added to Desktops) and the computer would take care of install.
> This is even a simpler install than on Windows systems since the ideal
> situation would be a *one-click* install, less authorization.
> 
> Dependency checks are a good thing, a mandatory thing, but the computer
> should take care most of this behind the scenes on the desktop.
> 
> 
>  
> 
> The second idea... have one standard rpm group naming structure.
> 
> The problem is quite clearly demonstrated by looking at all the
> different description found here - a sample of the present state of the
> naming structure.
> 
> http://rpmfind.net/linux/RPM/Groups.html
> 
> And I am not talking about different names but duplicated names. You
> know it is a mess when people don't not know to use Application,
> Applications, or use Application at all, or even use English. This
> redundancy is seen throughout the whole list. Add to this it has spilled
> over into the desktops and placement of desktop links. GIGO (garbage in,
> garbage out)
> 
> Now when I am looking for a library, where should I look? "Libraries",
> "System/Libraries" (Mandrake), "System Environment/Libraries" (mostly
> RH), "Development/Libraries" (e.g., libxml, along with libxml-devel),
> and I even have one in "Gnome/Development"
> 
> 
> My recommendation is to create *one* three tier category naming
> structure.
> 
> First level - System Category (App/Library/System/Development) this way
> *all* libraries would be under Libraries, period.
> Games, even thou an Application would need in its own top level do to
> its volume.
> 
> Second level - General Category related to System Category
> 
> Third level - A group within the General Category
> 
> Examples
> Development/Tools/Compilers
> Development/Tools/IDE
> Development/Languages/Perl
> Development/Languages/Python
> Games/Cards/Solitaire
> Games/Arcade/FPS
> Apps/Editor/vi
> Apps/Office/Word Processors
> 
> 
> Yes, people are using some of these, just make it into a standard.
> 
> First publish the standard list and what should go where and why. There
> has to be one central authority for the naming structure otherwise the
> problem will still exist.
> 
> Add to the rpmbuild program a qualifying check for the name so if it
> does not qualify the person is warned it is not the standard. The list
> would be kept as an external database for easy updates.
> 
> Add an option to the rpm program reassign group to a standard name -
> empower user to clean up some of the mess.
> 
> Get the major distros to agree to and *use* this standard.
> 
> No need, even thou ideal, to do a blanket change, just phase the new
> structure into new rebuilds.
> 
> Imagine how much a mess Unix and Linux would be if there was no standard
> directory structure? I am just stating the obvious.
> 
> 
> Thank you for your time, Gabriel Phoenix
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>