ubuntu-tweak in new

[Scott Kitterman]

On Friday, August 06, 2010 09:30:04 am Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Thursday, August 05, 2010 10:15:55 am LI Daobing wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 22:21, Scott Kitterman <ubuntu at kitterman.com> 
wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, August 03, 2010 09:16:05 pm LI Daobing wrote:
> > >> On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 09:09, Scott Kitterman <ubuntu at kitterman.com>
> 
> wrote:
> > >> > On Tuesday, August 03, 2010 09:05:25 pm LI Daobing wrote:
> > >> >> Hello,
> > >> >> 
> > >> >> On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 09:00, Scott Kitterman
> > >> >> <ubuntu at kitterman.com>
> > > 
> > > wrote:
> > >> >> > On Tuesday, August 03, 2010 01:29:46 pm Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> > >> >> >> Ubuntu Tweak is waiting for approval in New queue.
> > >> >> >> http://ubuntu-tweak.com/
> > >> >> >> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/252140
> > >> >> >> 
> > >> >> >> Is this something MOTU wants included?
> > >> >> > 
> > >> >> > No.
> > >> >> > 
> > >> >> > It looks to me like something that, in addition to proper
> > >> >> > packaging, ought to have a thorough functional review before
> > >> >> > entering the archive.
> > >> >> 
> > >> >> I am the packager of ubuntu-tweak, can you tell me what's the
> > >> >> problem with ubuntu-tweak?
> > >> > 
> > >> > I don't know that there is a problem, but given the invasive nature
> > >> > of it's functionality, I think it appropriate for it to be given
> > >> > more of a review than just being packaged properly.  In Ubuntu's
> > >> > history there have been multiple "Tweak" programs and so far they
> > >> > have always proved to be more harmful than helpful at the scale the
> > >> > Ubuntu archive operates.
> > >> > 
> > >> > This one may be the one that gets it right, but having found that
> > >> > they rebrand PPAs that other people maintain as there's on their
> > >> > web site, I'm not at all inclined to assume this is all well
> > >> > intentioned.
> > >> 
> > >> you are right.
> > >> 
> > >> this package is active-maintained, and I'll forward your opinion to
> > >> the upstream author. I think he'll fix this bug.
> > >> 
> > >> ubuntu-tweak is very useful for me, and it's also has many users. so I
> > >> want to push it to Ubuntu and hope it can catch ubuntu 10.10.
> > >> 
> > >> thanks.
> > > 
> > > I don't have a lot of time for a detailed review.  A quick look shows
> > > that this can enable quite a number of untrusted repositories.  My
> > > recollection is that we although Envy was initially accepted doing
> > > something similar it was required to be fixed to not do this.  I don't
> > > think a package that adds untrusted repositories is suitable.
> > 
> > ubuntu-tweak does not add any ppa to /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ by
> > default. this only happens when user ask it do.
> > 
> > the add-apt-repository command in python-software-properties package
> > also can add ppa to sources.list, so I don't think ubuntu will reject
> > software like this.
> 
> As was already commented, the difference is that it presents a list of
> specific PPAs and is not just a generic tool to make adding of PPAs easier
> for non- technical users.
> 
> Scott K

Sorry about this one.  I re-replied to an olde message in the thread by 
mistake.

Scott K