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

Re: New Package Process

gdk redhat com (Greg DeKoenigsberg) writes:

>> > How will we scale this project to a million packages?
>> I do not think that we will have millions of packages... freshmeat
>> lists around 35000 packages and we (Core + Extras) are currently at
>> 2000 packages.
> s/million/bazillion or any arbitrarily large number.  I certainly don't 
> intend to be didactic.

The range is important; millons of projects can be packaged in an
industrial manner (e.g. auto-spec generators) only, while 10000-20000
packages (afaik Debian has 16000 packages currently) can be generated

>> > Because that's the goal.  The goal of Fedora Extras, in my mind, is to
>> > provide all of the software in the world to all of the people in the
>> > world.  Nothing less.
>> I would add the word 'high-quality' somewhere... Thousands of crappy
>> packages do not help somebody and make the repository useless.
> You know, that *sounds* like a good argument, but on further reflection, I
> don't *actually* think that's true.  Is Sourceforge any less useful
> because there are thousands of poorly-maintained projects?

On Sourceforge, poorly-maintained projects can be detected easily (e.g. do
not trust a g* or k* project with a version number of 0.1). Programming
applications from scratch is much more expensive than doing a quick test.

But things for Fedora are different... When FE would have a high rate of
crappy packages, I have to review every package which I am going to
install. Often, a review is more time consuming than hacking a package
From scratch so such a repository would be useless.

As your next 'apt-get upgrade' could install new, untested deps,
auto-update mechanisms would be very risky.


Attachment: pgp00179.pgp
Description: PGP signature

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