Graeme Gill, 2010-07-29 20:26:44 +1000 : > Richard Hughes wrote: [...] >> Put yourself in my shoes. Fedora is very strict about using external >> libraries rather than internal ones, and I had to do quite a bit of >> work to allow argyll to continue to be shipped in Fedora. I deal with >> a lot of upstream projects in my day-to-day work and argyll is much >> harder than most to package. Including 4 modified copies of external >> libraries is not exactly best practice in software development. Using >> a build system that's obsolete and needs patching before running is >> kinda unusual. All these things raise the bar for pushing this to >> millions of users. > > Hi, > > Sorry, but to me it is simply disfunctional behaviour - Fedora > deserves to fail if it puts dogma ahead of practicality. Despite my previous emails, I have to side with Richard here. What you call “dogma” is actually considered “best practices” in the distribution world, and it's *based on* practicality and experience. Embedded copies of libraries are an extra burden for distributors because of the combinatorics involved when one of these libraries needs to be updated for whatever reason (security update, porting to a new architecture, porting to a new version of a compiler, porting to an entirely different compiler, and so on). Shared libraries actually help maintain a working system with a reasonable amount of work, and that's a practical advantage. The same applies for the build system: many people dislike autotools, but many people understand it, which means that maintenance work isn't restricted to a few gurus. It does push some more work upstream, of course (pushing for integration of your patches into the libraries you forked), but it actually provides practical benefits: distributors can focus on their integration work, upstream authors can focus on their project (where they're most competent), the same applies for authors of libraries, and in the end users get up-to-date software on their distribution. Pointing the users to your site is good for some users, but not everyone wants to grab and compile stuff themselves. On the other hand, there's machinery in the distribution that can go “Hey, it seems you have a colorimeter plugged into this computer, shall I install Argyll for you?” and the user gets it all working in a matter of seconds (that's called discover-pkginstall in Debian, something similar probably exists for other distros). Making it easier for the distro to ship an Argyll that's as close to the original as possible is good for everyone. Pardon the rant :-) Roland. -- Roland Mas Bonjour, je suis un virus de signature. Propagez-moi dans la vôtre !