Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again

Le 16-02-2025, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> a écrit :

On 15 Feb 2025 22:36:39 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
>

No distro maintainer will package an unknown software made by un unknown
developer.

>
Not sure what that’s supposed to mean.

It means that if a well known developer was creating a new software, the
package managers can take care of it. But if nobody hear about a
developer the package managers won't take care of his software if they
aren't already well spread. Either the software is well spread or the
developer is already known, if none of them are

There are a couple of packages in the standard Debian repo with my
name on them; do I count as an “unknown developer” to you?

OK, so your packages are released in Debian. How about Ubuntu? How about
Mint? How about Archlinux? How about Guix? How about Fedora? If I want
to use your packages, I need to install Debian and if I want to use
packages managed only by Fedora, I need to have both distros installed at
the same time and switch between them? That's why there are so many
people switching between distros?

Debian is huge: I think there’s something like 50,000 packages in the
standard repo.

It's nothing compared with the number of softwares available on github,
gitlab and others like gnu. For example, where is the package for
icecat?
<https://www.gnu.org/software/gnuzilla/>
So what are the Debian package managers doing? Like I said, a lot of
requirements are needed before a software is packaged by a distro. And
before that, the software developer needs a way to distribute it.

You think there are that number of famous-name developers out there?

The famous is not the only requirement. Contributing to a well spread
software is enough when you aren't famous. But for the new software to
become well spread, it needs to have a way to be distributed. So, we're
back at the beginning : either the developer spend all of his time for
it to be managed by all package managers or he is using an easy way to
deploy it everywhere. Which is the purpose of all the things you refuse
to see the point.

Remember also that each distro includes all the tools for maintenance of
the distro itself, as open source, in its standard repo. It is usually
quite easy for users to create their own add-on repos, with additional
packages not available in the standard distribution -- Ubuntu PPAs are one
well-known example of this.

Yes, using ppa for ubuntu, using aur for archlinux, and using everything
for every distro and we're back at the beginning: the programmer spend
more time to distribute it than to develop it. Or he's using a method
which you refuse to see the purpose.

And from there, it’s not a big step, if there is sufficient demand, for a
package to migrate from an “unofficial” repo to an “official” one.

Yes, for one distro. But there are dozens of popular distros.

This is how the Open Source community works.

s/is/was/

Everything comes from those who choose to contribute,

Yes, they contribute: they develop softwares and are using new ways to
provide them to the community.

not from those who just sit on their bums and complain.

I'm not complaining. You are the one complaining about snap/flatpack and
others. You say it's useless, I'm telling you why it's not. I'm not
saying snap and flatpack are good: I'm saying the reasons behind them are
real.

And the reasons behind NixOS, Guix and immutable distro like Silverblue
are the same but seen by the package maintainers. They all disagree with
you. Maybe their solutions are bad, but anyway, they do them because
there is a real pain with the way you are promoting.

--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io