Active Topics
-
Nokia Booklet 3G (RX-75) Drivers (60)
to Alternatives by Maemish - 19 hrs, 15 mins ago -
Is there a section to talk about Java ME? Apps, etc. (7)
to General by teroyk - 3 days, 15 hrs ago - more...
|
2010-08-22
, 10:04
|
|
Posts: 278 |
Thanked: 303 times |
Joined on Feb 2010
@ Norwich, UK
|
#22
|
Originally Posted by fms
What, exactly, do you imagine that would achieve though? If that were to happen, Nokia would have to switch the default enabled repo to your new "extras-safe" repo, and stuff in "extras" would still need to include warnings to end-users and would require testing from people who bother doing so.
1. Rename Extras to Extras-Safe
2. Rename Extras-Testing to Extras
3. Leave Extras-Devel as it is
Do you agree with my modest proposal?
End result, no change whatsoever from the current situation except the repos have different names.
|
|
2010-08-22
, 10:13
|
|
Posts: 3,319 |
Thanked: 5,610 times |
Joined on Aug 2008
@ Finland
|
#23
|
Originally Posted by fms
I already mailed Niels to provide us with the numbers if possible so we'll see - I'm just highlight aspects so that people don't jump to conclusions, either way. I also asked if maybe we could get the number of downloads of the Packages file of the different repositories, that would be a far closer metric to what we are curious about here.
To me, the number of downloads is a sufficient measure of repo popularity. You can, of course, produce all kinds of arguments to the contrary, but if Extras-Testing or Extras-Devel had several times more downloads than Extras, then the only conclusion is that they are way more popular than Extras.
Yes, I completely agree with your point. So, in order to serve these people, I propose to do the following:
1. Rename Extras to Extras-Safe
2. Rename Extras-Testing to Extras
3. Leave Extras-Devel as it is
Do you agree with my modest proposal?
__________________
Blogging about mobile linux - The Penguin Moves!
Maintainer of PyQt (see introduction and docs), AppWatch, QuickBrownFox, etc
Blogging about mobile linux - The Penguin Moves!
Maintainer of PyQt (see introduction and docs), AppWatch, QuickBrownFox, etc
|
|
2010-08-22
, 11:21
|
|
Posts: 1,418 |
Thanked: 1,541 times |
Joined on Feb 2008
|
#24
|
Originally Posted by attila77
I am suggesting to name the repositories according to their actual function. If Extras-Testing is no longer being used for testing, but rather for general distribution of software (as it appears to be used now), then the word -Testing must be removed. On the other hand, if Extras is actually being used by people who want to be safe from untested software, as you suggested, then it makes sense to rename it to Extras-Safe to signify its new function. As you see, my proposal simply follows your original statement about the status of Extras.
My question is who would this nomenclature change appeal to (as in, would it matter all that much, especially considering the potential confusion of swapping repositories) ? Or are you suggesting that we suggest Nokia to enable (what is now called) Extras-testing by default on the next firmware ?
 |
|
2010-08-22
, 11:24
|
|
Posts: 3,790 |
Thanked: 5,718 times |
Joined on Mar 2006
@ Vienna, Austria
|
#25
|
Originally Posted by fms
what problem would be solved by doing this?
I am suggesting to name the repositories according to their actual function. If Extras-Testing is no longer being used for testing, but rather for general distribution of software (as it appears to be used now), then the word -Testing must be removed. On the other hand, if Extras is actually being used by people who want to be safe from untested software, as you suggested, then it makes sense to rename it to Extras-Safe to signify its new function. As you see, my proposal simply follows your original statement about the status of Extras.
 |
|
2010-08-22
, 11:45
|
|
Posts: 1,635 |
Thanked: 1,816 times |
Joined on Apr 2008
@ Manchester, England
|
#26
|
I would like to see PPA style repositories
so that people can subscribe to individual developers upgrades and improvements without having to muck around with general upgrades to things they have from stable repositories
so that people can subscribe to individual developers upgrades and improvements without having to muck around with general upgrades to things they have from stable repositories
__________________
liqbase sketching the future.
like what i say? hit the Thanks, thanks!
twitter.com/lcuk
liqbase sketching the future.
like what i say? hit the Thanks, thanks!
twitter.com/lcuk
 |
|
2010-08-22
, 11:55
|
|
Posts: 1,012 |
Thanked: 817 times |
Joined on Jul 2007
@ France
|
#27
|
lcuk : this is in progress with the Community Meego OBS ...
__________________
Benoît HERVIER, Khertan
KhtEditor - Sdist_Maemo - Khweeteur - PyPackager - KhtSimpleText - KhtNotes - KhtBMA - Wleux - and more ...
Benoît HERVIER, Khertan
KhtEditor - Sdist_Maemo - Khweeteur - PyPackager - KhtSimpleText - KhtNotes - KhtBMA - Wleux - and more ...
| The Following User Says Thank You to Khertan For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2010-08-22
, 12:04
|
|
Posts: 1,418 |
Thanked: 1,541 times |
Joined on Feb 2008
|
#28
|
Originally Posted by benny1967
The problem of Extras being pretty much dead in the water, due to excessively restrictive promotion policies. Of course there is an easier solution to this problem: just relax the promotion policies. But a few "super-testers" in the crowd are obviously against this solution.
what problem would be solved by doing this?
|
|
2010-08-22
, 12:12
|
|
Posts: 3,790 |
Thanked: 5,718 times |
Joined on Mar 2006
@ Vienna, Austria
|
#29
|
Originally Posted by fms
Extras is not "dead in the water"; it's in fact more successful than the ovi store where developers get both Nokias support and the chance to make money.
The problem of Extras being pretty much dead in the water, due to excessively restrictive promotion policies. Of course there is an easier solution to this problem: just relax the promotion policies. But a few "super-testers" in the crowd are obviously against this solution.
But then, your proposal wouldn't actually change anything:
Extras-safe (now extras) would be the one repo activated by default in Nokias firmwares. There's no way they'd ever activate a repository that contains applications that are not well tested.
Extras (now extras-testing) would not be activated by default. There would be a procedure for applications to be promoted from extras to extras safe. This procedure would be the same as the one we have now. also, as a consequence, there would be a warning for users that this new "extras" contains untested applications and they shouldn't install unless they really know what they're doing.
So what exactly are we talking about?
Last edited by benny1967; 2010-08-22 at 12:21.
| The Following User Says Thank You to benny1967 For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2010-08-22
, 12:18
|
|
Posts: 1,418 |
Thanked: 1,541 times |
Joined on Feb 2008
|
#30
|
Originally Posted by benny1967
That is where things get really pitiful: when you are forced to compare it to the Ovi Store to show how "successful" it is
Extras is not "dead in the water"; it's in fact more successful than the ovi store where developers get both Nokias support and the chance to make money.
1. Rename Extras to Extras-Safe
2. Rename Extras-Testing to Extras
3. Leave Extras-Devel as it is
Do you agree with my modest proposal?
Computer and Console Emulators for Maemo, Symbian, and more.
Pack Rat: The Maemo Package Aggregator.