From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Mickey Subject: Packaging vs. Maintaining (was: [PATCH] xscreenshot and imagefile) Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 12:31:35 -0700 Message-ID: <87oaitjvc8.fsf@codemac.net> References: <87a8uf2c94.fsf@netris.org> <87oaiue4hh.fsf@netris.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51782) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZKtYM-0007Dh-81 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 15:31:43 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZKtYI-0002WA-7c for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 15:31:42 -0400 Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]:52245) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZKtYI-0002Vo-1i for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 15:31:38 -0400 Received: from nevada.codemac.net (unknown [208.187.204.132]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 0DB2568015F for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 15:31:35 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87oaiue4hh.fsf@netris.org> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: guix-devel@gnu.org * Mark H Weaver [2015-07-29 19:58]: > Do other people think that such programs belong in Guix? I've only gotten 1 package into guix so far, so take my thoughts with a grain of salt. I liked the Arch model[0] when I was a dev: core, extra, community + AUR.[1] The AUR I would credit with a vast amount of Arch's early popularity as it got lots of software packaged before devs had time to get to it, but it includes lots of non-free software. To show how drastic their split is, here are the arch package numbers for i686: Core - 209 packages. (linux, linux, bash, mkfs, ssh etc) Extra - 3141 packages. (emacs, vim, X, firefox, kde/gnome etc) Community/AUR - 61251 packages. 4014 audited binary packages, 57237! source packages that are unaudited and pacman doesn't build them for you. There are many pieces of software. There is only a finite amount of development commitment. Arch namespacing their packages by dev commitment is a successful example of managing this. Guix could use a policy (and package namespacing?) that delineates this commitment so that contributions can be accepted without misunderstanding. My random stab at a delineation: - 'core' and 'extra' - I like arch's definition for these. Highly selective and essential that all packages in core are tested and in working order. Extra is a statement of the devs commitment currently working on guix, and includes the vast majority of the GuixSD software stack. - 'community' - Due to guix's source based architecture, this is the software that meets guix's licensing goals, coding standards, and compiles/runs. The packages may or may not be up to date, and are not actively maintained by guix developers, but are popular with the community and built with hydra. There is room for another even wider set, a guix-users.git or something that contains the long tail of packages like the AUR. With GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH this may be as easy as a git repo with some base submission guidelines. Sorry that went long - just some thoughts. // codemac [0]: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Official_repositories [1]: https://aur.archlinux.org