Re: A proposal for a package management system

On 2012-01-24 08:28, Gilles Espinasse wrote:

> Yes package management is for me a priority on next version (not 2.0.x,
> probably 2.1)

What for?

Updating IPCop is extremely easy for users. Info is passed via 
ipcop-announce, after which 1 or 2 clicks are needed in the GUI.

Having only one IPCop makes it easy to know what exactly someone is 
running in case help is asked.

Preparing IPCop updates is work, but easier in v2 than it was in v1.4.
Making a lot of small packages does not make the work any easier/faster.

I see no reason to make 'IPCop modules' that can be installed on demand. 
IPCop is small enough, and we try hard enough to keep it small, so that 
it can be installed on modest hardware.

If someone believes a package management is helpful for addons, I 
suggest reviving the addon-server-project-thing.
Probably better find out why it failed though, before investing time.
If someone wants to install addons, that's fine, but it has to be clear 
that there is no such thing as an "IPCop-approved-addon".


Olaf

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Try before you buy = See our experts in action!
The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3,
Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2