Bazaar Explorer and PPA

[Alexander Belchenko]

Russel Winder пишет:
> On Mon, 2010-01-18 at 16:08 +0200, Alexander Belchenko wrote:
> [ . . . ]
>>> 2.  Oh no not another PPA :-((  Why can't we just have one PPA for all
>>> the core Bazaar related released stuff.  I really don't want to have
>>> 1000s of entries in my source.list.
>> I don't understand you: I'm windows user and don't use PPA. I'm just 
>> know "they are exist". That's all I want to know.
> 
> Conversely, I have no interest in Windows ;-)
> 
> The problem here for Ubuntu users is that aptitude/apt-get/synaptic
> require knowledge of all the sources of installable packages.  Each and
> every source has to be named and the signing key installed.  This means
> the fewer the number of sources the better.  Splitting Bazaar components
> into separate PPAs is the fastest way to having no-one use them.
> Having all the Bazaar components in a single PPA is an administrative
> nightmare.   So really this is a lose--lose situation.  The right
> balance is to declare a core set of components (and qbzr and bzr-gtk
> call squarely into that set for Ubuntu) and suffer the management hassle
> for these components.
> 
> The other argument I can use is that if Bazaar Explorer is on the Bazaar
> PPA then QBzr really ought to be as well.

Usually I'm doing source releases for QBzr, build windows installer for 
QBzr, and Gary build PPA package.

Me and Gary are not part of the team who manage main bzr PPA, so every 
time Gary has to ask somebody to copy our PPA to bzr PPA. I don't see 
the way how to improve this situation.

> 
>>> oh and
>>>
>>> 3.  If stuff on the Bazaar PPA is out of date and really isn't going to
>>> be updated, please can someone remove it so as to avoid people getting
>>> thoroughly confused.  
>> +1 on this.
> 
> If I had the rights I'd just do it, but . . . 

I have no rights either.