Dude, no need to shouttrey wrote:WHY CANT WE MOVE IT TO NON-FREE FFS
Scheduled Maintenance: We are aware of an issue with Google, AOL, and Yahoo services as email providers which are blocking new registrations. We are trying to fix the issue and we have several internal and external support tickets in process to resolve the issue. Please see: viewtopic.php?t=158230
Renaming of Ion3 in Debian
- chrismortimore
- Posts: 849
- Joined: 2007-04-24 06:34
- Location: Edinburgh, UK
Re: Renaming of Ion3 in Debian
Desktop: AMD Athlon64 3800+ Venice Core, 2GB PC3200, 5x320GB WD 7200rpm Caviar RE2 (RAID5), Nvidia 6600GT 256MB
Laptop: Intel Pentium M 1.5GHz, 512MB PC2700, 60GB 5400rpm IBM TravelStar, Nvidia 5200Go 64MB
Laptop: Intel Pentium M 1.5GHz, 512MB PC2700, 60GB 5400rpm IBM TravelStar, Nvidia 5200Go 64MB
That would fill up the repositories, and make APT a pain in the ass to use (I'd hate searching for something and finding 30 versions of it). I don't think the developers will change how they update the repositories for this one package.tuomov wrote: * You could distribute packages that include the version in the name, and something like "may be out-dated" in the one-line description shown by e.g. apt-cache search.
Again, I don't think the developers will go out of their way to do this. Of course, nothing it stopping you from programming a utility into Ion3 that will warn the user when there is a new version on your site/their current version is 28 days old (Maybe put the release date in a file and compare it to the current date?)tuomov wrote: * You could have the package display a notification that it may be out-dated (with dialog, or whatever is usually used).
APT already does this, using update-notifier. Of course, not everyone uses update-notifier, but once you go to install a package APT warns you that you have outdated packages; The only way to miss an update from Debian's repositories is if you just don't use APT.tuomov wrote: * You could have the package (or install tools) actually check whether there's a new release (from Debian's site and mirrors, preferrably), and only notify then that the package is out-dated. I think this would generally be a good system to have, to notify of possible security issues etc., that have not yet been fixed. (Didn't Debian promise to take care of these promptly?)
Jabber: pobega@gmail.com
Pronunciation: Poh - Bay - Guh
Pronunciation: Poh - Bay - Guh
It's done with the kernel.Pobega wrote:That would fill up the repositories, and make APT a pain in the ass to use
This belongs in the installation phase; I don't like software "calling home" when you use it. In the installation phase, the package is downloaded in any case. Of course, Ion could check that only during first use of a new version, but users that get the package from my site know that it is the latest; it's the distributions that are the problem.Of course, nothing it stopping you from programming a utility into Ion3 that will warn the user when there is a new version on your site/their current version is 28 days old
That was not the issue: the issue was that the package maintainer might not have time to make a new package within 28 days. But he should have time to insert a notification somewhere, that the present package is not up to date. Or he could simply just not press the dead man switch.APT already does this, using update-notifier. Of course, not everyone uses update-notifier, but once you go to install a package APT warns you that you have outdated packages; The only way to miss an update from Debian's repositories is if you just don't use APT.
Also update-notifier seems to be for a completely different purpose: present users getting notifications of updates. Might I reiterate, that I don't care about users using old versions -- if some version works for them, fine -- they know when they installed it, and if they've been using it for very long, should know to look for a new version, if they run into problems. I care about new users getting old versions, or people having their Ion updated to old versions, when they want to install it for the first time, or update it. Same with significant modifications: users that have modified their own copy, know it; they don't necessarily know that the distribution has modified the version in such a manner, that the author wants to have nothing to do with it.
Last edited by tuomov on 2007-05-09 11:39, edited 1 time in total.
Wait - Packages in the Debian repositories are done in the kernel? I originally thought you meant that the package maintainers upload packages like ion-2.3.59, ion-2.3.62 for the package names.tuomov wrote:It's done with the kernel.Pobega wrote:That would fill up the repositories, and make APT a pain in the ass to use
Yeah, I don't like when software calls base either, and it's a dirty way to do it but I think it's the only way possible that would work on every distribution without having to go through conversations like this on eight different forums.tuomov wrote:This belongs in the installation phase; I don't like software "calling home" when you use it. In the installation phase, the package is downloaded in any case. Of course, Ion could check that only during first use of a new version, but users that get the package from my site know that it is the latest; it's the distributions that are the problem.Of course, nothing it stopping you from programming a utility into Ion3 that will warn the user when there is a new version on your site/their current version is 28 days old
Oh, okay, now I get what you mean. That would be a good idea I suppose, but I still think the program would just end up in non-free (I know you don't care though) and would just say "This version is not guaranteed to be up to date", or something along those lines. The only downfall to being in non-free is a lot of people (Including me) refuse to download from non-free unless it's completely nessecary (i.e. firmware for some hardware), but considering what you want to be the final result I guess that can't be a bad thing.tuomov wrote:That was not the issue: the issue was that the package maintainer might not have time to make a new package within 28 days. But he should have time to insert a notification somewhere, that the present package is not up to date. Or he could simply just not press the dead man switch.APT already does this, using update-notifier. Of course, not everyone uses update-notifier, but once you go to install a package APT warns you that you have outdated packages; The only way to miss an update from Debian's repositories is if you just don't use APT.
Well, you could always put something in Ion telling the person your homepage; And maybe grabbing the current version number against their current working version, and in bold red print echo "Your version of Ion is outdated and no longer supported by the original author". Again, we don't want to call home, but this is the best way to get the point across throughout all distributions in my opinion.tuomov wrote:Also update-notifier seems to be for a completely different purpose: present users getting notifications of updates. Might I reiterate, that I don't care about users using old versions -- if some version works for them, fine -- they know when they installed it, and if they've been using it for very long, should know to look for a new version, if they run into problems. I care about new users getting old versions, or people having their Ion updated to old versions, when they want to install it for the first time, or update it. Same with significant modifications: users that have modified their own copy, know it; they don't necessarily know that the distribution has modified the version in such a manner, that the author wants to have nothing to do with it.
Jabber: pobega@gmail.com
Pronunciation: Poh - Bay - Guh
Pronunciation: Poh - Bay - Guh
Pobega wrote: Wait - Packages in the Debian repositories are done in the kernel? I originally thought you meant that the package maintainers upload packages like ion-2.3.59, ion-2.3.62 for the package names.
Code: Select all
$ apt-cache search kernel-image
kernel-image-2.6.14 - Linux kernel binary image for version 2.6.14.
kernel-image-2.6.7 - Linux kernel binary image for version 2.6.7.
kernel-image-2.6.6 - Linux kernel binary image for version 2.6.6.
... and the list goes on ...
It's the distributions' problem, and nagging is best done in the installation phase.Yeah, I don't like when software calls base either, and it's a dirty way to do it but I think it's the only way possible that would work on every distribution without having to go through conversations like this on eight different forums.
- DeanLinkous
- Posts: 1570
- Joined: 2006-06-04 15:28
So you want something dumbed down for a user? I consider it a users problem if they want the latest version of something.
I think a package that has gone thru testing/usage and freeze have proven themselves and are the exact type of packages I expect to see in the stable release.
If everything was is so stupid/wrong/kludge with GNU+Linux - why did you ever get involved?
I think a package that has gone thru testing/usage and freeze have proven themselves and are the exact type of packages I expect to see in the stable release.
If everything was is so stupid/wrong/kludge with GNU+Linux - why did you ever get involved?
Aye, fight and you may fail, sellout, and you may live, a while. And dying in your MScash beds, you'll be willin' to trade ALL the cash, to come back here and tell our enemies that they may FUD our customers, but they'll never take...OUR FREEDOM!
Oh, now I see. I misinterpereted what you meant before!tuomov wrote:Pobega wrote: Wait - Packages in the Debian repositories are done in the kernel? I originally thought you meant that the package maintainers upload packages like ion-2.3.59, ion-2.3.62 for the package names.Code: Select all
$ apt-cache search kernel-image kernel-image-2.6.14 - Linux kernel binary image for version 2.6.14. kernel-image-2.6.7 - Linux kernel binary image for version 2.6.7. kernel-image-2.6.6 - Linux kernel binary image for version 2.6.6. ... and the list goes on ...
Well, this is because of apt's scheme; When apt upgrades a package it removes the original first. If they used normal versions of kernel images, then it would delete your current kernel before installing the new one. At least this is how I understand it. The kernel is the only exception to this rule, and I think a window manager is the last thing I'd expect to see a packaging scheme like this from.
Edit: Contact the package maintainer, and try to get a Debian developer involved in your discussion. Hopefully we can get some type of resolution out of this.
Jabber: pobega@gmail.com
Pronunciation: Poh - Bay - Guh
Pronunciation: Poh - Bay - Guh
It's the developer's problem too, when the user is dumb, or lazy. And it's not really dumbing down, it's also providing a decent service. Apt-get install and similar tools are so convenient, that I'm too lazy to check random programs' pages whether the version provided in Debian is something that I should bother with at all. So apt-get could tell me about it.DeanLinkous wrote:So you want something dumbed down for a user? I consider it a users problem if they want the latest version of something.
Development snapshots of Ion have ended up in the "stable" Debian, and I've had users seeking for support for them. And as for software marked stable by the author -- any updates to them are important bug fixes that distributions should provide.I think a package that has gone thru testing/usage and freeze have proven themselves and are the exact type of packages I expect to see in the stable release.
It didn't suck so much ten years ago. Linux had promise. It no longer has.If everything was is so stupid/wrong/kludge with GNU+Linux - why did you ever get involved?
Woops, sorry about that. I am not on Debian at the moment (Barely had time to use my laptop since I got it back) so I didn't have the time to research thatbenh wrote:I started this thread because I am the maintainer!Pobega wrote:Contact the package maintainer, and try to get a Debian developer involved in your discussion. Hopefully we can get some type of resolution out of this.
Jabber: pobega@gmail.com
Pronunciation: Poh - Bay - Guh
Pronunciation: Poh - Bay - Guh
- DeanLinkous
- Posts: 1570
- Joined: 2006-06-04 15:28
By far the best solution. Good job to both of you benh and tuomov for being able to come to an agreement in a professional manner.benh wrote:Thanks to everyone who suggested names.
However, I've discussed things with Tuomo and we've agreed on changes to the package so that it does not need to be renamed.
- DeanLinkous
- Posts: 1570
- Joined: 2006-06-04 15:28
dammit! I say rename for the heck of it. We could get some ugly press out of yet-another-debian-renamed-package
Aye, fight and you may fail, sellout, and you may live, a while. And dying in your MScash beds, you'll be willin' to trade ALL the cash, to come back here and tell our enemies that they may FUD our customers, but they'll never take...OUR FREEDOM!
I'm actually pretty happy that tuomov and you could come to a mature solution, even though I don't personally use Ion. Good job the both of you.
Jabber: pobega@gmail.com
Pronunciation: Poh - Bay - Guh
Pronunciation: Poh - Bay - Guh
It's a dirty brute-force hack that I wouldn't particularly like as a user... the package checks the site on install for newer versions. Better solutions would demand only a bit more architecture, that isn't there, but wouldn't be difficult to add if people could be arsed. But ugly hacks is the FOSS way of things.Pobega wrote:I'm actually pretty happy that tuomov and you could come to a mature solution, even though I don't personally use Ion. Good job the both of you.
(The architecture would be e.g. a small database of triples (package, upstream-version, checked-when) downloaded by apt* update. The tool could even make the check on install instead of the package, for packages that ask to complain when upstream-version does not match, or checked-when is too old (or this information is not available). Users could also use this service to check whether other packages they are about to install are too old to bother with.)