disagree with both of you, although indeed, unless explicitly mentioned, PPAs should not be positioned as 'official', since they are NOT.
we already have dozens of private repositories around, and it is not for us to judge either they are of any use -- time and their use would show. The role of PPAs as far as I see it to 1. enable with ease construction of personal repositories, 2. make them really easily available on Debian systems, 3. CENTRALIZE their location under Debian's umbrella. Benefits would be numerous: from actually QAing (e.g. automatic lintian, rebuilds etc) so that e.g. no sponsorship request is even accepted unless package passes PPA QA, to possibly even serving them as the possible venue for custom packaging work of the derivatives (thus making it easier to put it into Debian proper). On Tue, 03 May 2011, Andreas Barth wrote: > > I do not agree on this, if the package is good enough and has somebody > > willing > > to maintain it, the package may belong to the archive. > Eh, the PPAs we are speaking about is like "new features to existing > packages". Yes, we need to avoid PPAs which are just dead ends. > Andi -- =------------------------------------------------------------------= Keep in touch www.onerussian.com Yaroslav Halchenko www.ohloh.net/accounts/yarikoptic -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110503213954.gs16...@onerussian.com
