[arc-discuss] [sysadmin-discuss] [install-discuss] [pkg-discuss] Seeking early guidance for integrating a new package system into O/N. (conary)

[Dave Miner]

Bruce Rothermal wrote:
> Dave Miner wrote:
>> Bruce Rothermal wrote:
>>   
>>> I don't think anybody is saying that there is anything wrong with 
>>> pkg-get. But I don't think there is anything wrong with vi. Whats wrong 
>>> with having 10 different package management systems if they all work. 
>>> Thats 10 different ways that people can then start using Solaris and 
>>> Sun. They're not asking you to do the work they are asking us how can we 
>>> do the work to add to Solaris and make it more theirs. People want to be 
>>> part of Solaris.
>>>
>>>     
>> I wouldn't view it as quite such a benign situation.  There's a reason 
>> why most distributions settle on one packaging system.
>>
>> Providing multiple packaging systems for a particular set of 
>> functionality involves a cost to the development, testing, and support 
>> associated with it.  Interacting with multiple packaging systems also 
>> generally will impose a cost on users, because while they may work 
>> individually, they rarely do so in a collective sense, and that's a big 
>> part of the user's definition of "work".
>>
>>   
> But each group should carry the burden of their own development and 
> testing. IPS should not carry the burden of some other packaging system. 
> If we don't promote diversity we may as well all just start running 
> Windows and using Microsoft Update.

Packaging is not a leaf node in the system where changing it impacts 
almost nobody else.  Supporting multiple packaging systems is close to 
the same impact throughout a development and user space as supporting 
multiple incompatible kernels, compilers, or libc's.  Yeah, you can do 
all of those things, but everyone pays.

Dave