On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 01:23:12AM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> PPAs as a developer tool are one thing, PPAs as a tool for random uploads, I
> think are quite another. I'd hate to see Debian make the same mistake that
> Canonical did in this regard.
PPA on Debian infrastructure should be lim
On Wednesday, May 04, 2011 12:34:45 PM Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Paul Tagliamonte dijo [Wed, May 04, 2011 at 12:16:54AM -0400]:
> > > AFAIU, only DD and DM could create PPA and upload to them. If this is
> > > not the case, then I share your fears.
> >
> > Usage of the PPA system on LP requires that yo
Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt dijo [Wed, May 04, 2011 at 10:42:31AM +0200]:
> (...)
> If anyone would have actually read the PPA proposal, they would know
> that uploads were and are intended to be restricted to DDs and DMs
> (which can break buildds anyway, if they want) and building should
> happen in t
Paul Tagliamonte dijo [Wed, May 04, 2011 at 12:16:54AM -0400]:
> > AFAIU, only DD and DM could create PPA and upload to them. If this is not
> > the case, then I share your fears.
>
> Usage of the PPA system on LP requires that you agree to the usage
> terms (not unlike machine usage policies for
Stefano Zacchiroli dijo [Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 12:56:15PM +0200]:
> > I think it would make quite sense to get something like e.g. ppa done for
> > Debian. But thats something else than it's proposed here.
>
> Yes, absolutely. I'd even dare to say that having something like PPA for
> Debian is a pr
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 08:28:00AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 01:23:12AM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > I believe Debian is quite correct to be
> > concerned about the potential for user confusion and damage to Debian's
> > reputation for high quality work.
> >
Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt, 2011-05-04 10:42:31 +0200 :
> Heya,
>
> Roland Mas writes:
>> Mike Hommey, 2011-05-04 07:57:47 +0200:
>>> Add to that that allowing random people to upload packages to be built
>>> on Debian build daemons is a recipe to have the buildds compromised.
>> My initial idea ab
On 4 May 2011 15:23, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> That depends on what you mean by 'issue'. I think exactly the issues that
> concern some people in Debian about packages of 'poor quality' being
> generated
> in an uncontrolled PPA system are happening with regularity in Ubuntu.
> Although it doesn'
Heya,
Roland Mas writes:
> Mike Hommey, 2011-05-04 07:57:47 +0200:
>> Add to that that allowing random people to upload packages to be built
>> on Debian build daemons is a recipe to have the buildds compromised.
> My initial idea about how one would go about implementing them
> involved very s
Mike Hommey, 2011-05-04 07:57:47 +0200 :
[...]
> Add to that that allowing random people to upload packages to be built
> on Debian build daemons is a recipe to have the buildds compromised.
My initial idea about how one would go about implementing them
involved very strict isolation of the bu
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 01:23:12AM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> That depends on what you mean by 'issue'. I think exactly the issues that
> concern some people in Debian about packages of 'poor quality' being
> generated
> in an uncontrolled PPA system are happening with regularity in Ubuntu
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 01:23:12AM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 04, 2011 12:16:54 AM Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> > On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 12:02 AM, Julien Valroff wrote:
> > > Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 à 00:02:01 (+0200 CEST), René Mayorga a écrit :
> > >> On Tue, May 03, 2011 at
On Wednesday, May 04, 2011 12:16:54 AM Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 12:02 AM, Julien Valroff wrote:
> > Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 à 00:02:01 (+0200 CEST), René Mayorga a écrit :
> >> On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 11:30:41PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> >> > After all, in that re
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 12:02 AM, Julien Valroff wrote:
> Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 à 00:02:01 (+0200 CEST), René Mayorga a écrit :
>> On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 11:30:41PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>> > After all, in that respect what is the difference between that and
>> > unofficial APT
>> >
Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 à 00:02:01 (+0200 CEST), René Mayorga a écrit :
> On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 11:30:41PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > After all, in that respect what is the difference between that and
> > unofficial APT
> > repositories that many of us already maintain at people.d.o/~
On Tue, 03 May 2011 at 14:46:11 -0600, René Mayorga wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 12:56:15PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > I'd even dare to say that having something like PPA for
> > Debian is a priority.
>
> I do not agree on this, if the package is good enough and has somebody willing
On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 11:30:41PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 02:46:11PM -0600, René Mayorga wrote:
> > > Yes, absolutely. I'd even dare to say that having something like PPA for
> > > Debian is a priority.
> >
> > I do not agree on this, if the package is good eno
disagree with both of you, although indeed, unless explicitly
mentioned, PPAs should not be positioned as 'official', since they
are NOT.
we already have dozens of private repositories around, and it is not for
us to judge either they are of any use -- time and their use would show.
The role of PP
On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 02:46:11PM -0600, René Mayorga wrote:
> > Yes, absolutely. I'd even dare to say that having something like PPA for
> > Debian is a priority.
>
> I do not agree on this, if the package is good enough and has somebody willing
> to maintain it, the package may belong to the a
* René Mayorga (rmayo...@debian.org) [110503 22:52]:
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 12:56:15PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 12:07:24PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > >
> > > I think it would make quite sense to get something like e.g. ppa done for
> > > Debian. But that
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 12:56:15PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 12:07:24PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> >
> > I think it would make quite sense to get something like e.g. ppa done for
> > Debian. But thats something else than it's proposed here.
>
> Yes, absolutely.
On Sat, 30 Apr 2011, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> Yes, absolutely. I'd even dare to say that having something like PPA for
> Debian is a priority. It would be yet another way to enable people to
> experiment with big changes in Debian, showing their value, with minimum
> impact on the work of others
On 30 April 2011 20:56, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> Some FAQ on this topic:
>
> Q: Why don't you use Launchpad's PPA?
> A: Last time I looked into it (together with some Launchpad engineers at
> past UDS), the PPA module was too tightly integrated with other
> Launchpad parts to be deployable
Stefano Zacchiroli, 2011-04-30 12:56:15 +0200 :
[...]
> What we lack for that to become a reality is "just" the code. Marc and
> Tollef had set up a nice proposal [1] for GSoC this year and were
> willing to mentor it, but unfortunately no student has shown up. If
> there are people willing to co
I too believe PPA for Debian is a "must have", I personally was
thinking of making my own repository where I would "store" packages
before having them pushed into Debian, even if it was for
experimental.
Putting packages on Ubuntu PPA just doesn't feel right, thus I fully
support this idea and wou
* Stefano Zacchiroli (lea...@debian.org) [110430 12:56]:
> What we lack for that to become a reality is "just" the code. Marc and
> Tollef had set up a nice proposal [1] for GSoC this year and were
> willing to mentor it, but unfortunately no student has shown up. If
> there are people willing to c
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 12:07:24PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Philipp Kern (tr...@philkern.de) [110430 09:49]:
> > It's not that it isn't meant. Of course we could also look at overlay
> > solutions. (That said, while I'm very happy about mozilla.debian.net, I
> > somehow still feel that tho
27 matches
Mail list logo
