On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 10:24:49 +0200 Johannes Winkelmann <jw@smts.ch> wrote:
Hi Victor,
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 09:07:27 +0200, Victor Martinez wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 08:15:37 +0200 Johannes Winkelmann <jw@smts.ch> wrote: [...]
1. User interface: less commands -------------------------------- [...] http://jw.smts.ch/pg-ng 7 commands in pgt replace 18 in prt-get. The 'find' generalizations might be a bit too much, I may go for a find/list combo.
I see less commands but less intuitive too. May be with its use, it will be more intuitive (like all things). Agreed, it'll definitely take some time to get used to it. I'll try to upload a test version as soon as possible, it's hard to get a real feeling without using it.
The test version can be good for testing objectives too. (Bug tracking, new improvements, comments about the code...)
I'd also agree that after such a long time, it's maybe a bad idea to change the interface so drastically. OTOH I think just because we got used to something doesn't make it less ugly :-), which is reason enough to think about changing it.
Well, if the objective is to make things better, I can't see a problem to make those changes, using this new version will solve the problem with time ahead, the more use, the more confortable we will be with it. The only problem I can see is for someone who manages some workstations and uses personal scripts for maintain them, it can be a bit hard to adopt this new pgt over prt-get, but all can be changed/adopted to a new version with tests and patience.
2. Dependency handling ---------------------- [...] In this way, you remove the diy though by default. I mean, you make things automated instead of let the user keep track of ports/packages. Yes, the default behaviour is changing. I'm not sure how many users resolve dependencies by hand, that's one reason for this RFC.
I typically use 'install' myself, but I have to admit I don't know why. And if I don't want t dependency, I typically use --ignore= along with depinst. In this case, I could just as well use 'lock' to make it clear.
I'd really like to hear how others handle this. Do you normally use install and track dependencies by hand? Do you often ignore dependencies as specified by the maintainer? Should "depinst/install -D" be optional, for example for large transaction like gnome?
In my case I feel very confortable with the depinst command. I am using it over opt/contrib. I try to keep track of dependencies (deptree) and see if all are covered in those repos (which following the guidelines must cover this issue in contrib). For private repositories I try to check Pkgfiles and all deps, sometimes without using depinst, but if the private repo came from a trust user, I only check Pkgfiles to see if they follow the standard way to build Pkgfiles (some of them don't use --disable-nls for example). I hope people can check this thread and give comments about it, to see how they work and see if they can show issues/problems or any kind of comment, which will be usefull for the comunity.
An alternative approach could be to make this user configurable, i.e. have 'install -D' (with dependencies) and 'install -N' (no dependencies), and let the user set the default behaviour if none is specified.
I see the default policy using -D to keep track of all deps, I mean, to use the new advatanges about deps tracking (1 of the changes). Giving the user the config option (commented out by default for example) can be good too.
Thanks for your comments, Regards Johannes
Thank you too for your work and new improvements. -- Learning bit by bit. -pitillo-