Re: RPM for gnome-libs 1.0.54?

[Paul G Cooper <pgc maths warwick ac uk>]

I think there seems to be some misunderstnading here - at least unless I
misunderstand ;-)

gnome-libs-1.0.54 isn't even out yet - what is released is a test version
that will become 1.0.54 provided there aren't any horrible bugs. As such
it should be considered for developers and experienced testers only. Hence
only in tar.gz. form. tar.gz automake etc is like the entrance exam to
check that you know enough or a re presisitant enough that if xxx.tar.gz
wrecks stuff you fix the wreckage up and tell the developers what went
wrong (or fix it). Like all exams it's not perfect. 

If there are too many development/testing things out there in rpm form
then if they have bugs it can damage our reputation and cause the list to
be deluged (alot of the time with not very helpful messages).

Since 1.0.0 it has been real easy to get the latest stable release via
rpm. 

Just be patient and the 1.0.54 will be out in rpm form when it's ready.

Of course this is just my opinion and not "official" gnome policy,

Paul

On Wed, 3 Nov 1999, Raul Acevedo wrote:

> Keith Wright wrote:
> 
>  > This is just an RPM command with the build-from-zip'ed option.  It's not
>  > up to the Gnome programmers to document rpm.  Start with 'man rpm', if
>  > that doesn't do it RedHat sells a book called 'Maximum RPM'.
> 
> Wrong. 
> 
> Looking up "man rpm" assumes I know I want rpm to do something.
> 
> Tarballs vary wildly, containing everything from a simple Makefile to a
> whole autoconf setup.  It would never occur to me that rpm could be smart
> enough to `figure out' whatever is inside a tarball and magically make RPMs
> out of it, because to me this seems intractable.
> 
> Ah, but people put spec files in the tarballs to help it out!
> 
> Such knowledge is a mystical magic secret because it is not well
> publicized.  If it is not well publicized, it might as well not exist.  All
> you gung ho programmers out there please reread that 20 or 30 times, write
> it on your foreheads, and make it popup on your computers every half hour. 
> 
> Ah, but if you had fully read all 13+ pages of "man rpm", or the 450 pages
> of "Maximum RPM", you would know this!
> 
> The beauty of rpm is its simplicity, which means I haven't had to read all
> 13+ pages of its man page, or a whole book, to know how to use it.  THIS IS
> HOW IT SHOULD BE.  Again, if tarballs->RPMs were a semi-obvious thing, then
> maybe I should have looked into it.  But it never even remotely occurred to
> me because that seems impossible.  The magic about spec files and
> programmers putting them in there is just that, magic, unless it is made
> public.
> 
> Finally, it is really annoying and incomprehensible to me that people STILL
> have this attitude "programmer's shouldn't document, users should RTFM".
> Yes, to some degree this is true, and I've many a times told people,
> including myself, to RTFM.  BUT THIS ATTITUDE IS WHY GNOME IS NECESSARY IN
> THE FIRST PLACE.  GNOME is necessary for Linux and Unix because this
> attitude made them hard to use.  It is this attitude that hinders more
> widespread acceptance of them. 
> 
> I can understand that programmers don't want to spend much time on stuff
> like this.  They don't necessarily have to.  I don't care who does it.  The
> GNOME project, as an entity, has to find people to do these things.  It has
> organizers whose job is to oversee these details.  To simply say "well the
> programmers don't want to do it, so some random volunteer just has to", is
> wrong.  There has to be an effort to make certain things happen, whether
> it's by programmers, or the people that do documentation, or the people
> that write up the web sites, or come up with spec files, or whatever.
> 
> My apologies for being so negative.  I love Linux.  I love GNOME.  Believe
> it or not, I think everyone on the project does an amazing job.  It pains
> me to complain so much about this.  But I only do it because it needs to be
> said to make the project better, for the benefit of everyone.
> 
> Raul
> 
> 
> -- 
>         FAQ: Frequently-Asked Questions at http://www.gnome.org/gnomefaq
>          To unsubscribe: mail gnome-list-request@gnome.org with 
>                        "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
> 

-------------------------------------------------------
 Paul Cooper           | pgc@maths.warwick.ac.uk  
 Phd Research Student  | 01203 523523 ext. 26325
 Room 129              | www.maths.warwick.ac.uk/~pgc/                         
 Mathematics Institute |                          
 University of Warwick |                          
 Coventry, CV5 7AL     |                          
-------------------------------------------------------