[Simplygnustep-discuss] Re: [LinuxSTEP-General] Re: GNUstep repository (was LinuxSTEP + Integration
Status: Alpha
Brought to you by:
cehardin
From: Chad H. <ceh...@ma...> - 2003-01-04 19:14:11
|
"Tim Harrison" wrote: > (pardon the cross post to the LinuxSTEP-General list -- I figured people > might be interested there, as well) > > > Dennis Leeuw wrote: > >> The problem of LinuxSTEP vs SimplyGNUstep is the different approach. > > I don't see this as a problem. I see it as just a different approach. > >> - Create a small and simple distribution meaning with only the bare >> essentials: >> - libc (in /lib) >> - basic Un*x tools (for /bin and /sbin) think of login, awk, sh, etc.. >> - only the absolutly needed libraries (in /usr/lib) >> like libxml, libtiff, libjpeg, etc. >> - the un*x build tools (in /usr/bin and /usr/sbin) >> like make, gcc, etc. >> >> - X11 living in /usr/X11 >> >> - GNUstep living in /usr/GNUstep > > Then you've negated one of the major reasons for LinuxSTEP to exist, and > hence, there's no point in proposing a merger. If you want the > traditional FHS structure, with GNUstep in /usr, then use SimplyGNUstep. > Or Debian. Or Slackware. For SuSE. Or Red Hat. However, that's > contrary to what we're doing. > Actually SimplyGNUStep puts the GNUstep stuff in /. There's /Applications /Library, etc. It think the biggest divergence between LXSTEP and SGSTEP is that SGSTEP places the the *traditional* UNIX stuff in the *Traditional* places and hides it. LXStep, OTOH, has a completely new and different hierarchical file system layout. Also, I'm sure we will end up sharing things. If one group makes a needed .App, then the other can use it to, and vice-versa. >> I think a team of about five to ten people could pull this off. To > > If following the FHS, and no porting is required, you wouldn't need five > to ten people. The main reason we're taking so long to get our stuff > out the door is porting. We need to make things work with the structure > we've defined. > Untitled <dis...@gn...> >> create this solution one needs a server that holds all the data, and >> which could also serve as the repository for the GNUstep apps. A single >> maintainer would be able to package from the different sources the >> sources of the apps and provide them to the GNUstep community. > > I don't think one needs to centralise everything for a solution. > GNUstep.net hasn't centralised all the applications, nor have any of the > other GNUstep-specific application sites. Most people release their > projects on their own web sites, and just send out an email. They tend > not to want to go through the process of signing into someone else's > server, through another web interface, and uploading their latest > versions there, or to any number of other sites. > > With the type of FHS system you're proposing, it sounds to me like > things wouldn't need to be specific to the system. That's one of the > benefits of GNUstep, as I see it. So, the only difference is packaging. > If there was a packaging system accepted for general use, it would > most likely be something provided via the makefile system, so one could > type "make package" or somesuch, and *poof*, you have a package. No > maintainer needed. Just an extra command by anyone who's releasing. > > Of course, this means that GNUstep maintainers would need to accept some > submissions into -make from those making packaging systems, so that one > could potentially type "make lsp", for example, and create an LSPM > package. Same for any other package management system. > >> What is needed is a single server to start with. Enough bandwidth for >> the ISO downloads and some spare time and dedication. >> So the first question that pops up is where do we get the money to >> install a server with enough bandwidth. > > Where I work, bandwidth is not a limitation. Nor is having a box (or a > ew boxen) in the data centre a problem. > >> And the second question is, are there enough people willing to invest >> time to pull this off. > > I think you missed the first question. Are the LinuxSTEP and > SimplyGNUstep camps willing to/able to merge. > > In my opinion, the goals of the individual projects are potentially too > far apart. There would have to be a fundamental shift from both camps > for a merger to occur. > > |