[packman] Future of PackMan?

[Guido Berhoerster]

* Ludwig Nussel <ludwig.nussel at suse.de> [2012-01-10 16:40]:
> Guido Berhoerster wrote:
> > * Detlef Reichelt <detlef at die-mafia.de> [2012-01-01 22:56]:
> >> what should we do in the future? What is the goal of PackMan?
> >>
> >> Should we build only multimedia and non crippled stuff for openSUSE?
> > 
> > I think that it isn't necessary to change the scope of Packman or
> > reduce the number of packages that are provided today but that a
> > reorganization and greater collaboration between openSUSE and
> > Packman would provide benefits to both maintainers and our users.
> > Currently Packman provides three categories of packages: software
> > which is not allowed in OBS (non-free but redistributable,
> > patented etc. mostly in Essentials and Multimedia), newer
> > versions of packages which are in the main distribution (in
> > Extra), and additional packages which are not in the main
> > distribution (in Extra, Games, Multimedia).
> > I'd suggest reorganizing the latter two categories by submitting
> > unique Packman packages to suitable OBS development projects and
> > subsequently Factory and by merging duplicate packges with their
> > OBS counterparts.
> 
> Ack. Factory ftw!
> 
> > If there is a demand for a backport and
> > continuous updates of a package it could be linked into a
> > dedicated Packman project similar to how media player packages
> > are already shared between OBS and Packman
> 
> I thought there is Tumbleweed for those who always want the latest and
> greatest? Updates that make sense should be released into the regular
> update channel.

I think there was some demand (at least by Detlef) to have
selected backports of some packages for all supported openSUSE
releases which is a different scope than Tumbleweed and probably
not suitable as regular updates either. I'd strongly prefer to
have such packages were in a separate backports repo rather than
spread through Extra, Games, and Multimedia.
-- 
Guido Berhoerster