Debian PPAs (please no)

[Deshapria]

Actually, I can see the opposite happening -- at least users who attempt to add PPAs will see a clear "Debian" option and will use that rather than seeing an "Ubuntu" PPA and presuming that, because "Ubuntu is based on Debian", adding that will not cause problems.

If you need a ppa from Ubuntu's Launchpad, you could download the deb package and have look inside using an Archive Manager. In the Debian folder, you'd see what controls the package, and in the other folders, for example usr, you'd see what it actually contains. Most times, all you have to do is copy and paste the needed files in respective folders in your system.

+1 Yes, that's what I do. But the drawback is of course that it will not automatically be upgraded.

That's the whole idea. It should never be automatically upgraded. One should never upgrade an app, if it works. When you open up a deb package, you'd find the dependencies, and most times the libraries are the same.

[spacex]

That's the whole idea. It should never be automatically upgraded. One should never upgrade an app, if it works. When you open up a deb package, you'd find the dependencies, and most times the libraries are the same.

Yes, and that's fine for me and you. But I'm not sure that it is fine for the average user. Their deducting skills are somewhat limited, and they don't necessarily automatically figure out what's causing something to stop working.
'
Just something as simple as a broken gtk-theme can display itself in ways that the average user never would link to a recent gtk-upgrade. In such cases, having the theme automatically upgraded for them so they don't end up with such a issue, would be a good thing. Otherwise you risk them messing up their system trying all sort of things, when a upgraded gtk-theme was all it took to fix the missing nm-applet or whatever....

[Deshapria]

That's the whole idea. It should never be automatically upgraded. One should never upgrade an app, if it works. When you open up a deb package, you'd find the dependencies, and most times the libraries are the same.

Yes, and that's fine for me and you. But I'm not sure that it is fine for the average user. Their deducting skills are somewhat limited, and they don't necessarily automatically figure out what's causing something to stop working.

Exactly.
The average user won't install vanilla Debian, maybe some user friendly remix of Debian. There are few around.

[Head_on_a_Stick]

There are few around.

@spacex has an excellent version in his signature

[/tmp]

That's the whole idea. It should never be automatically upgraded. One should never upgrade an app, if it works. When you open up a deb package, you'd find the dependencies, and most times the libraries are the same.

Yes, and that's fine for me and you. But I'm not sure that it is fine for the average user. Their deducting skills are somewhat limited, and they don't necessarily automatically figure out what's causing something to stop working.

Exactly.
The average user won't install vanilla Debian, maybe some user friendly remix of Debian. There are few around.

I disagree; I set up a vanilla Debian for my old neighbors and they love it. This is especially exciting considering they're not technical people.

[Deshapria]

Exactly.
The average user won't install vanilla Debian, maybe some user friendly remix of Debian. There are few around.

I disagree; I set up a vanilla Debian for my old neighbors and they love it. This is especially exciting considering they're not technical people.

You installed it for them, but they'd never even try to--they are the average users, not you.

[exploder]

I would like to see a few ppa repos maybe for things like stable LibreOffice packages for example. I don't see a need to go crazy with ppa's though.

[Deshapria]

I would like to see a few ppa repos maybe for things like stable LibreOffice packages for example. I don't see a need to go crazy with ppa's though.

Yes, I do too.
PPA or Personal Package Archives are created by the community, meaning users just like us for us. Whatever the name, the Debian users should have such acommunity created archive. Arch has Aur, Ubuntu has PPA, what do we have?

Ubuntu being Debian based, we can look inside the PPA, see what dependencies needed and install. Linux is all about files, so we may be able to copy and paste too.

[Randicus]

PPA or Personal Package Archives are created by the community, meaning users just like us for us.

How many of those people know how to make packages? And how many of those few people know how to make reliable packages? Being restricted to packages created by people who know what they are doing? The nerve! How dare they?

Whatever the name, the Debian users should have such acommunity created archive. Arch has Aur, Ubuntu has PPA, what do we have?

If I had a blue and orange shirt, would you want one too, because not having one would make you inferior to me? And of the three: Arch, Ubuntu and Debian, which has the fewest bugs?

Ubuntu being Debian based, we can look inside the PPA, see what dependencies needed and install.

Ubuntu is based on Debian, but they are not the same. The projects have different philosophies and goals. They do their thing and Debian does its.

Linux is all about files, so we may be able to copy and paste too.

That's the spirit! Copy-and-paste from other distributions and then ask "Why did my system suddenly stop working?"

[GarryRicketson]

Well , I like the idea of having PPA s for Debian available, so if I want to use one I can,
If I don't want to use any ppas for debian, then I don't have too either.
But I think it is a good thing to make them available, Why should we not have usefull
stuff available, just because a few idiots don't have the sense to use them correctly, does that mean they should not be available to anyone ?
I will even go so far as to say thank you, in advance, Debian Developers, for making ppa's available, and also a big thank you for making Debian available, I appreciate all the effort and work that goes into that, very much.
Thanks from Garry
Edited: I wonder if any of the real Debian developers even read these kind of threads ? on this forum.
Edited again, :

Postby Randicus »:That's the spirit! Copy-and-paste from other distributions and then ask "Why did my system suddenly stop working?"

Hope this isn't taken wrong, not trying to be a "smart alec", or argue,
Anyway, for those that enjoy answering that kind of question "Why did my system suddenly stop working?" well, that keeps them busy,... And for those that don't like answering that kind of question, over and over, they don't have to bother either. And there are all ways the
"few" or maybe it is "many" idiots, that insist on ignoreing what any guidelines or manuals say.
It is handy when one can find a script or file that is from the same version they are using, and be able to just "copy" and paste , should those , also not be available, just because of the idiots that might copy and paste them into a different version?

[Randicus]

Why should we not have usefull
stuff available, just because a few idiots don't have the sense to use them correctly, does that mean they should not be available to anyone ?

The point I was trying to make is that user-contributed packages would be not be a good addition to a system that prides itself on stability, unless the users contributing packages are also among the distro's developers. If a few users want to create an unofficial repository of packages, other users can install them at their own risk. However, I doubt that is a good route for Debian to take.

[GarryRicketson]

The point I was trying to make is that The point I was trying to make is that user-contributed packages would be not be a good addition to a system that prides itself on stability, would be not be a good addition to a system that prides itself on stability,

Ok, I think I was misunderstanding, then, ... I agree there, "sourceforge" is a good place for
that (" user-contributed packages "), there is some good "packages" and programs available there, but one needs to really be careful, there is also a lot of "junk" that "wanna be" programmers upload, and no support or documentation what so ever.
Anyway, PPA's created specifically for Debian, and handled by the debian devlopers, would be
a welcome addition to the debian resources, at least in my opinion,

[Deshapria]

I suppose a "wannabee" developer had created the Plank dock, and that was done for Ubuntu, and posted on Launchpad, which is owned by Cannonical. Some of us "Debianites" would like to use it, but cannot, if we stay away from using PPAs. That developer had kindly given directions for us to install Plank on our Debian installation just below the line "Ubuntu, Debian and derived systems are fully supported by Plank" in http://wiki.go-docky.com/index.php?titl ... Installing

Plank is a pretty and very simple dock, but we don't have it. Still, thanks to Launchpad, a "wannabee" developer had uploaded it. Would we like to use Plank? So, should we have such apps for Debian?

[Randicus]

I had never heard of Plank, so I did a little research.

Plank is the underlying technology for Docky

I was already familiar with the description of Docky, because it is in Debian's repository. So Debian users can either install the Plank PPA or install Docky with a simple apt-get. Granted, it will drag in a couple Gnome dependencies, but it is not necessary to resort to PPAs.

[Deshapria]

I had never heard of Plank,..

That's one of the problems we have...If we had PPAs or something like PPAs, we might've heard about apps like Plank. I suppose, people have heard about an distro called Elementary, and if so, they'd heard about Plank. (I took Plank as an example here.)

There is also a very nice menu called Slingshot, and that too is available as a PPA. Or, one can install the needed dependencies and copy & paste the singshot bin file into /usr/bin. Of course, you'd need few gnome libs. There is a very old Slingshot, which I use in my Xubuntu Wily remix. You can see that here; http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php? ... &start=796

[Head_on_a_Stick]

Arch has Aur

Generally speaking, the AUR contains all the software that did not pass the quality control required to make it into the official Arch repositories.

Archers are advised to minimise their usage of AUR packages if system reliability is a concern.

Use precaution when using packages from the AUR. Most are supplied by users and may thus not have the same standards as those in the official repositories.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/En ... d_packages

At any rate, PPA packages can already be safely added to a Debian system by following this simple guide (also linked by fireExit earlier):
https://wiki.debian.org/CreatePackageFromPPA

[Deshapria]

Arch has Aur

Generally speaking, the AUR contains all the software that did not pass the quality control required to make it into the official Arch repositories.

Archers are advised to minimise their usage of AUR packages if system reliability is a concern.

Sure, you see the same warning about using PPAs on Ubuntu based distributions at Launchpad. Still, if you want the said Plank and/or Slingshot, you still have to use PPAs. Elementary OS's main points are Plank & Slingshot, for example, and it is a very popular distro. (Not a Debian-based distro, but a Ubuntu one.)

At any rate, PPA packages can already be safely added to a Debian system by following this simple guide (also linked by fireExit earlier):
https://wiki.debian.org/CreatePackageFromPPA

But still, they are Ubuntu's PPAs, not Debian's. The question is, do the Debianites need Debian User Created Archives (or something of that nature) or do we keep using Ubuntu's PPAs?

As you know, we have Debian-based distributions with some user-created scripts. Practically all are with such scripts, and some of them are made as deb packages. We happily use these distros, but don't complain that those scripts/deb packages as "oh no, they are like PPAs," do we?

Those developers put them in GitHub, Sourceforge or even on their own websites. We use them, without complaining, post in their websites etc, but we keep on whining against PPAs, maybe because they are Ubuntu's, correct? Isn't that name of this thread?

[Head_on_a_Stick]

As you know, we have Debian-based distributions with some user-created scripts. Practically all are with such scripts, and some of them are made as deb packages. We happily use these distros, but don't complain that those scripts/deb packages as "oh no, they are like PPAs," do we?

Those developers put them in GitHub, Sourceforge or even on their own websites. We use them, without complaining, post in their websites etc, but we keep on whining against PPAs, maybe because they are Ubuntu's, correct? Isn't that name of this thread?

Hello Monara, why do you insist on hiding behind sockpuppets?

You won't get banned here, don't worry...

We don't complain about those distribution's scripts & .debs (and I presume you are referring to BunsenLabs [1] here) because they are *not* like PPAs.

PPAs contain binary packages which are compiled in an Ubuntu system and so may be incompatible.

The BunsenLabs .debs are compiled in a Debian system (well, chroot) and are 100% compatible.

[1] We have a live ISO now!
http://crunchbang.org/forums/viewtopic.php?id=39994

[Deshapria]

As you know, we have Debian-based distributions with some user-created scripts. Practically all are with such scripts, and some of them are made as deb packages. We happily use these distros, but don't complain that those scripts/deb packages as "oh no, they are like PPAs," do we?

Those developers put them in GitHub, Sourceforge or even on their own websites. We use them, without complaining, post in their websites etc, but we keep on whining against PPAs, maybe because they are Ubuntu's, correct? Isn't that name of this thread?

Hello Monara, why do you insist on hiding behind sockpuppets?

You won't get banned here, don't worry...

We don't complain about those distribution's scripts & .debs (and I presume you are referring to BunsenLabs [1] here) because they are *not* like PPAs.

PPAs contain binary packages which are compiled in an Ubuntu system and so may be incompatible.

The BunsenLabs .debs are compiled in a Debian system (well, chroot) and are 100% compatible.

[1] We have a live ISO now!
http://crunchbang.org/forums/viewtopic.php?id=39994

>Off Topic< My name is Deshapria. It is Asian, but not Indian.
Monara is the official bird of India. I am not Indian. >/Off Topic.<

On topic.
Are we talking against PPAs, or about a concrete distro?
All Debian based distributions use scripts and sometimes deb packages. These scripts/debs are not authenticated by Debian, are they? So, we do use Personal Package Archives of a kind, aren't we?

So, why so much anger & frustration against PPAs?

>Off Topic< My simple Debian netinstall with Openbox starts with 109 MB RAM. Can you match that?>/Off Topic<

[Head_on_a_Stick]

So, why so much anger & frustration against PPAs?

I'm not angry or frustrated (about PPAs anyway).

However, as I (and fireExit) said earlier, the linked Debian wiki guide should be followed to compile the Ubuntu PPA package in the host system.

>Off Topic< My simple Debian netinstall with Openbox starts with 109 MB RAM. Can you match that?>/Off Topic<

My Debian sid system with dwm starts with ~78MiB