Alternatives for application-specific package management

On 11/27/05, Reinhard Tartler <siretart at gmail.com> wrote:

> If the software is extensible with extra data, the user should install
> it in his home. I don't see what apt or other package managment tools
> can do about that.

Well, IMHO that's part of the problem, although I think apt _can_ help
do something about that (but only when combined with more
application-specific tools).

> > His example with MIDI instruments means that there are (in theory) an
> > unlimited number of instrument packages, but there are only a limited
> > number of instruments that can be installed/configured at the same
> > time.  This requires extra constraints & configuration that's not
> > possible with general purpose apt frontends.
> >
> > In the case of TrueType fonts, you don't always want all fonts to be
> > installed at the same time (cluttering the font list in *all*
> > applications), but you want to have them around in case you need them.
>
> I don't quite understand. If a user wants extra fonts the system
> administrator does not provide for him, he should drop his fonts in
> ~/.fonts. Same for his MIDI instruments.

Which means you can only install unpackaged fonts, plugins, midi
instruments, etc. and have to know where exactly to dump them (and
maybe what to do to enable or configure them).

Also, an administrator can now install all available packaged fonts,
but some users might not want so many fonts in their font lists.

> I also think it would be up to his application using the MIDI
> instruments to provide some interface for easy installing of new
> instruments, if something like that is desired.

Such applications don't use and/or can't easily use packages provided
by Ubuntu now...

(I have some ideas about this, but I have to think them over & write them down.)

--
JanC