[maemo-developers] Enriching the Application Manager scripting experience

[From: Kees Jongenburger]

On 2/23/07, Marius Vollmer <marius.vollmer at nokia.com> wrote:
> Hi,extentions you expect
>
> (sorry, for the marketing attack in the subject, but it's Friday... :)
>
> we need to make the .install files more capable and more extensible
> for the future, so I came up with a design that I want to run past
> you.
Can you elaborate a little bit on what kind of problems you are trying to solve?

Please don't see this as a rant. I wonder how this experiment will turn out.
your the coder so you make the calls:p


I think the real problem is the difference between the way debian
repositories work
and what a software developer can provide(one package v.s a
repository). A real software vendor will want to provide a tested
package with no dependencies otherwise his software will brake and
playing with repositories is a deadly action. what happens with
sirocco and greagale users in your system

my "feeling" is that the xml based system would not really solve
problems but make it harder for somebody to understand what is going
to happen if he clicks yes

I think the .install system should follow such guidelines
-simple
-not allow booth the repository name and location to be changed
separately(security)
-The manager should download a list of "know" / valid /kinda trusted
list of repositories from maemo.org
-try to solve the problem server side by perhaps just sending a
different .install file or
allowing a minimal set of variables.insall=repo://maemo-extra:$distro/
-I should be able to click a .install file and I should be presented
with a list of proposed changes.
-Should really not contain "relative" path and other vague fields that
are hard to test
-Should have a "uninstall", I was not happy that when I removed canola
a lot of different canola bases packages remained on the system (this
is a debian problem)

Perhaps looking at the jar/.jad file format might be a good idea it
allows plenty of control to both the user and the developer (things
like an install success/failure automatic feedback url), and a list of
allowed operations/required services to be able to install. I think

in other words ,
what is the problem with the current .install format?