[ALL] New showroom for Openmoko apps

community at lists.openmoko.org community at lists.openmoko.org
Sat Aug 22 12:05:56 CEST 2009

On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 11:50:53AM +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:
>3) opkg/deb or manuall installation instructions only in first phase
>when its unknown package from unknown developer :)
>4) then community-editable list of distributions where it works/doesn't
>5) same list with sign if its included in standard repo of that distribution 
>and if its not included, user should provide a link to distribution bug tracker
>where is package request for that application and everyone could provide
>bbfile/src.deb as attachment in that bug, its quite easy. Distro
>maintainers than could check if that package is really that popular and
>if someone from users/developer itself provided working bbfile then commit it to
>their branch, remove link to bug tracker and set sign, thats already included.

I haven't had time read the entire thread, so this may have been discussed,
but there's so much to read I just need to get this out lest I forget it ;)

Having done some integration work in the past, this idea of "distributions
where it works" does not sound correct.

Distros have maintainers, which means the distro's software would always
work on the distro or they're doing something wrong. If this would start
off by being about official packages, we would just need one installation
of the site per distro, and show the contents of those distros.

The logical step after that would be to have unofficial packages or
packages recommended for integration or whatever, more-or-less 3rd-party
packages anyway, and by then we'd have the framework in place where
it either installs/works/whatever on a distro or not, and it either gets
displayed on that distro's site or not.

So if we use opkg.org as an example name, we would have om.opkg.org
and shr.opkg.org and friends.

Am I making sense?-)


More information about the community mailing list