Ubuntu installers?

[Owen Thomas]

On Sat, 7 Jan 2023 at 16:51, M. Fioretti <mfioretti at nexaima.net> wrote:

> On Sat, Jan 07, 2023 10:07:42 AM +1100, Owen Thomas wrote:
>
> > However, it would be excellent if Ubuntu took hold of one way of
> > installing software and eviscerated all the others.
>
> Owen,
>
> I already said I do share your pain, but unless I missed something in
> the previous posts, what you ask above is half impossible, half
> irrelevant.
>

Impossible is a word I might be able to appreciate. Irrelevant?

Why not consider bundling  a single package manager from a primary
distribution; one that is available from a bog standard download site that
anyone interested in Ubuntu would likely first encounter, say
https://ubuntu.com/download?


> You can eviscerate all you want, but if a package is unavailable
> in .deb format it will remain unavailable. That's the real and only
> reason why this whole discussion is happening..
>

A caveat given at the bog standard download site could explain that the
package manager included may only cover a subset of applications available
to Ubuntu, and if the interested potential user wants to include other
package managers then maybe they should be directed to another site with a
distribution that bundles other package managers as well.

I would think that package managers are software like any other. Can't one
therefore install another package manager through one they already have
installed? Why not then just include a single package manager in the basic
distribution, and leave the question of installing others to the user in
this way?


> Ubuntu the distribution, that is its team of architects, maintainers,
> testers etc.. has no resources to package every software in existence,
> and cannot force external developers to package their software in .deb
> format. So how could what you suggest solve that problem?
>

Doesn't this also apply to every package manager in existence? Does the
suggestion I make above make any sense at all?


> > Please keep Ubuntu simple...
>
> this is something to say to all the EXTERNAL developers who package
> their stuff only for installation via cpan, gem, pip, nodejs,
> containers and so on. It's THEIR unavailability to do so that creates
> the problem.
>

AFAIK, with all that you say about Ubuntu's problems, Windows has a single,
and a simple way of installing software to which all software vendors of
any significance use. So does IOS. Do they have similar problems? Being
that I don't think they do, why then should Ubuntu? Is Ubuntu trying to
nurse the varied preferences of its developer community at the expense of
the usability of its OS?


> The only thing the maintainers and users of Ubuntu, and hopefully all
> other distros could do would be to officially "condemn" those
> practices, with the argument made here and in my post. That would not
> be enough to *force* every independent developer to change ways, of
> course (and thanks heaven, I add), but it may start a change.
>

I couldn't advocate "forcing" anyone to do anything; I am well aware of the
fact people will do what they are determined to do regardless of what I
might think. However, some rationalisation of this package manager
proliferation problem seems overdue. Others have to realise this too, so I
think some real effort by the Ubuntu developer community to select and
promote a single package manager as that one that is supported by the
community would pay off because I think most of the wider Ubuntu user base
also might want this; they're just waiting for a signal from the Ubuntu
developer community.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/attachments/20230107/f3b19146/attachment.html>