brainstorming for UDS-N - Application Developers

[Marc Deslauriers]

On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 17:56 +0100, Evan Dandrea wrote:
> I think our current architecture for packaging and delivery is built on top of
> some misconceptions.  Namely, that we can solve the problem of buggy software
> getting into Ubuntu by fixing bugs in applications on behalf of developers,
> that packaging needs to be complex, and that we should be and ultimately need
> to be doing the legwork to package these applications ourselves.
> 
> Buggy software is going to get into Ubuntu no matter what we do, /but that's
> okay/.  Equally, if we patch these applications ourselves, what kind of message
> is that sending to developers about our trust of them, and whose responsibility
> broken software is?
> 
> If we have to package the applications ourselves because it requires years of
> experience and understanding of an inordinate amount of complexity, what does
> that say about our package management system?

I don't think that is the issue.

Debian-style packaging is pretty straightforward when compared to the
hoops you need to go through to create proper packages for other
operating systems. But, curiously, upstream developers do package for
Windows and OS X.

The real issue upstream developers face is the large number of
incompatible releases multiplied by the number of different Linux
distros.

One single package for Windows, one single package for OS X, 37
different packages for Linux. And new packages every six months, as it's
a moving target. What upstream wants to deal with that?

That is why we currently package it ourselves, and it has nothing to do
with the complexity of the packaging system.

Marc.