eclipse-pydev: New upstream release 1.3.13 avaible

Derek Broughton news at
Fri Feb 22 00:11:13 UTC 2008

Kristian Rink wrote:

> Derek Broughton schrieb:
> [general package management]
>> Exactly! :-)  The problem is not that Eclipse or anybody couldn't do it
>> this way, it's that unless you get buy-in from everybody (or at least
>> enough different groups to force a de facto standard) it doesn't work.
> Ever considered the idea that freedom of choice in solutions is a good
> thing? ;)

I consider it daily.  But when freedom of choice is used purely to justify
redoing something because you don't like the way it was done the four or
five previous times, then no, I don't consider it a good thing.

> Isn't that what we here are trying to do by promoting people 
> to choose (Ubuntu GNU/)Linux rather than a "de-facto standard" platform
> to run on their machines? In my eyes, here, interoperability would be
> important, but interoperability doesn't necessarily mean a homogenous
> technology.

And shouldn't - I'd just love to see a standard good enough to enable all
those different tools to be able to inform the other tools that they'd
installed something useful, and where it could be found.

> Throwing in apt actually _is_
> this second tool trying to override a solution already in existence, and
> (no offense) it's not rather smart at doing so.

Despite having occasionally mentioned that everybody should be using apt,
I'm really not wedded to it.  The problem is _always_ that no two update
managers understand each other (with the limited exception of apt
understanding rpm via alien - imperfectly).

> Eclipse has not been 
> built to live with apt. If Eclipse is packed to be installed via apt,
> _apt_ should be aware and honour things that happen inside Eclipse's
> package management, not vice versa IMHO. :)

In an ideal world, it shouldn't matter (either one should recognize updates
by the other) - but I'd be happy if apt was the one that got smarter :-)

>> Maven seems to mostly do this - but dependency checking is either weak,
>> or the project I'm working with got it wrong :-)
> Well... what kind of features do you miss about that, so far?

I'm using appfuse - whenever appfuse is updated, I have to manually change
all the version numbers for the dependencies in my pom.xml.  That's far
from useful


More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list