[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Kind request: fix your packages

On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 17:43, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> Le ven 03/10/2003 à 22:39, Sean Middleditch a écrit :
> > On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 16:11, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > > > Perl/Python are co-installable with different versions, and thus are a
> > > > different issue.
> > > 
> > > Oh, great, a second Perl installation. As if Python/Python2 wouldn't
> > > be enough already.
> > 
> > If that's what it takes to make things work, then that's what it takes. 
> > I didn't say it was perfect, just that it solves the problem that users
> > shouldn't ever have to rebuild to software, and users shouldn't have to
> > run around figuring out what their system is to find the right package
> > and deal with that mess.  In a truly ideal world, Perl/Python/etc.
> > wouldn't keep breaking compatibility so often.  ~,^  Since that's *not*
> > reality, the only solution left for sane packages (form a user's point
> > of view again) is to let any necessary versions be installed so the
> > user's apps just work and the user doesn't even have to think about OS
> > versions or dependencies.
> Don't make me laugh. The user cares about duplicate stuff too.
> Before we build a serious infrastructure that enabled us to modularise
> stuff someone would complain every other week we shipped java 1.3 jars
> with our tomcat rpm (and those jars were necessary to run it with a 1.3
> jvm, and didn't hurt when using a 1.4 jvm. But for a 1.4 user they were
> redundant stuff and we got complains).

Are you talking about users, or sysadmins/hackers?  I'd doubt a user
would even know a jar file is, or their installed version of Java. 
Certainly, every user I've dealt with recently (including a handful
friends and a number of coworkers) would have no clue; they can barely
remember their OS is "Microsoft Windows" and not "Compaq Explorer." 
;-)  (and no, that isn't an implication users are stupid, merely that
they often don't know much about computers.  i can't keep the names of
various parts of a car engine straight, but that's only because i'm not
really familiar with it, and I don't really care in the least, so long
as it moves.  just like many users don't care how the computer runs,
jsut that it works.  and yes, that was a real example, not my usual
satirical exaggeration ;-)

> Show me a repository with big fat packages that include all deps to be
> standalone and I'll show you a repository no one wants to use. Users may
> not all know the zen of packaging but it will only take a few long
> downloads or stuffed disks to enlighten them.

All dependencies embedded aren't at all needed.  Just the ones people
can't develop and/or package correctly.  If things were developed using
sane release and maintenance practices, you'd never have need to ship a
dependency with an application.  It's only when the dependency is
released/maintained in the usual inexperienced 13-year-old style that
you need to do that.  ~,^

> Cheers,
Sean Middleditch <elanthis awesomeplay com>
AwesomePlay Productions, Inc.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]