Re: [Ayatana] make adding ppas easier

[Evan Huus <eapache@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Monday, September 5, 2011, zekopeko <zekopeko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Matthew Paul Thomas <mpt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Kévin PEIGNOT wrote on 04/09/11 13:04:
>>>
>>> I don't agree. PPA should be used only to install unstable /
>>> unsupported features. I think the problem is that a lot of very good
>>> programs aren't in the default repository and need to be installed via
>>> PPA.
>>>
>>> PPA installation shouldn't be too easy for newbies, because it can be
>>> risky for their system, even if they don't realize that.
>>>...
>>
>> The Ubuntu Developer site is now just about ready to solve the problem
>> of good programs not being in the default repository.
>> <https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/>
>>
>> So now is a good time to think about how we can make Ubuntu safer by
>> making adding PPAs harder.
>>
>> - --
>> mpt
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
>> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>>
>> iEYEARECAAYFAk5krAsACgkQ6PUxNfU6ecog+wCeNJ0yZCexGxSR0vYG9z4ObEC0
>> OsoAmwYmLbOS7pX6oYAAW4w9oYyDhvHF
>> =E114
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>
>
> This is offtopic but the post-release process only solves part of the
> problem I tried to explain. If I'm reading PostReleaseApps[1] page
> correctly it would still mean that, as per example on the wiki,
> PyJunior would be locked only to version 1.0 while there might be 1.2
> out.
>
> To completely kill PPAs as means to upgrading applications there needs
> to be an upgrade mechanism for already existing apps beyond simple
> bugfixes. It would also increase overall stability/security since a
> developer is more likely to support a newer version (especially
> considering how fast the FOSS ecosystem moves).
>
> Bug 578045 [2] is a good read on the matter.
>
> [1] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PostReleaseApps/Process
> [2] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/software-center/+bug/578045
>
> This also touches on something I think Ubuntu should do and that is
> define their development platform. Pick an IDE such as Monodevelop,
> pick frameworks, languages etc. and provide an officially supported
> set of libraries that will ships with Ubuntu.

I kind of thought that's what Python + GTK + Quickly were, but I could be wrong. Or maybe Ubuntu just needs to do a better job of letting people know about them?

Evan