[debexpo-devel] Concept work nearly done

Jonny Lamb jonnylamb at jonnylamb.com
Thu May 22 17:14:04 CEST 2008


On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 10:43:09AM +0200, Christoph Haas wrote:
> between personal archives and public archives? I would rather think of 
> debexpo as a package marketplace. Everybody is free to upload, try, 
> download, comment on and sponsor any other package. My personal intention 
> was to have a software that is flexible enough that it works for 
> mentors.debian.net as well as a personal package archive. But I don't 
> think there will be a site that is used for sponsoring (like 
> mentors.debian.net) and at the same time provides personal non-public 
> archives that do not need to have the packages checked (plugins disabled). 
> How debexpo works on a certain deployment should be controlled through 
> variables in the INI files. Like whether binary uploads are allowed - or 
> only source uploads. Whether the comment feature is enabled. Which plugins 
> are run on uploaded packages. Etc. Examples:
[snip]

Ah, okay, yes I like this idea. It definitely simplifies things a lot.
Out of interest, are you interested in running binary uploads actually
on mentors.d.n?

Another thing, binary uploads are simple to define, *but* source uploads
could one of two definitions:

 * only upload source files (I.e. use dpkg-buildpackage -S). This is the
   current behaviour of mentors.d.n.
 * always upload binary but discard *.deb files.
 
The latter way is slightly the way that ftp-master works, except it doesn't
discard *.deb files. I have read that they would like to discard the
*.deb files but don't have the buildd power to do that. The point of
forcing binary uploads but discarding the *.deb is it forces the
maintainer to actually try building the package. Apparently, when Ubuntu
switched to source-only uploads (dpkg-buildpackage -S), there were many
packages that were uploaded but hadn't even been built to test if they
work... Thoughts? I don't really mind either way, but it's something to
think about.

[Yeah, that's right, I've been reading the dak source and its docs! :-)]

> That URL would just show the packages from this user. Perhaps it can even 
> be made apt-get'able per-user so that the above URL can be used by other 
> users to just access packages of this specific uploader. E.g.:
> 
>    deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/packages/jonny@lamb.info sid main

Yeah, that would be quite hot. 

> My point is: consider not seperating the needs of mentors.debian.net and 
> the PPA. I think that 80% of their needs are the same. And if 
> mentors.debian.net needs some extra check plugins then let's hack them in 
> (or let others do that through the plugin API). The basis for everything 
> is a web-based repository system that can host (source/binary) packages. 
> All the other behavior can be customized.

Yes this makes sense and I also prefer your idea -- looks like I
misunderstood the PPA idea.

A fairly big change here, but not a big change to the database schema. I
hope I haven't missed anything out.. Here is an updated schema:

    http://jdl.ducs.org.uk/misc/debexpo-db-3.png

Thoughts on this update?

Thanks,

-- 
Jonny Lamb, UK                                   jonnylamb at jonnylamb.com
http://jonnylamb.com                                     GPG: 0x2E039402
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://workaround.org/pipermail/debexpo-devel/attachments/20080522/11cea206/attachment.pgp 


More information about the debexpo-devel mailing list