Norman Ramsey wrote: > > There are other good reasons to have a central repository but I > > don't really buy the ease of use argument for the user. The end > > user still has to enable the extras repository. It would be just > > as easy for a user to install a meta package, maybe call it > > "maemo-universe", which adds every single repository in the > > universe to the sources list. For example, if it added all the > > repositories listed at http://www.gronmayer.com/it/, the end-user > > doesn't need to know the difference that n repositories were added > > versus one. The meta package could automatically update as new > > repositories are added/removed. > > > > Of course there are issues about trusting repositories, quality, > > etc. but that isn't an issue really solved with the extras > > repository unless some Nokia person is actually checking packages > > submitted to extras (which I doubt). I would trust a > > maemo-universe package with a repository list created by the > > community just as much as a random package in extras. > > As a long-time Debian user and even longer-time Unix developer, I look > at the maemo world and see chaos. I'd love to build and port some > apps but the barrier to entry is just too high. And as a user I see > only confusion. > > The maemo community would benefit greatly if a nucleus of volunteers > would step forward to implement some of the social apparatus behind > Debian: > > * A body of package maintainers who are trusted to make sure that > packages are OK. > > * GPG keys with which trusted maintainers can *sign* packages. > > * A *small* number of repositories with clearly defined missions. > (As a user, I want to *understand* /etc/apt/sources.list and know > who is signing the repositories that are in it.) > > * A process by which anybody can become a package maintainer. > > It's too bad Nokia didn't bootstrap such a process, but they didn't. > In fact, I think Nokia is making the problem worse by making critical > applications closed-source. (Or at least if the source to things like > Email, RSS Reader, and Clock is available, I can't find it.) > I can understand there is a business case about keeping device drivers > as closed source, although this is a question about which reasonable > people can differ. I can't see *any* reason why *any* application > should be closed-source. This doesn't benefit Nokia, and it inhibits > the formation of a community because only Nokia can see the major > applications. > > If anyone at Nokia is listening, I think if you move to a model of > open source apps, open-source kernel, proprietary device drivers, > which is a model the community understands, in the long run you are > going to sell a *lot* more tablets! > > Norman, I was in the process of writing an email along the same lines. I have been a long-term Linux user and programmer and must say that chaos abounds in OS200?/maemo land, sadly. I have an N800 and it is a very cool device, but the documentation, tutorials, howto, "training" materials - they all seem to rehash the same stuff in various ways, too many links to follow, too many combinations of OS/software versions that work or don't work in a particular setup, the number of repositories is confusing and in general I feel a bit lost. This whole "mess" could be easily resolved with the suggestions you provided above. Cheers, Ognen
