Software Management call for RFEs

Vít Ondruch vondruch at redhat.com
Thu May 23 14:23:07 UTC 2013


Dne 23.5.2013 15:30, Stijn Hoop napsal(a):
> On Thu, 23 May 2013 14:02:34 +0200
> Jan Zelený <jzeleny at redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 23. 5. 2013 at 10:53:10, Stijn Hoop wrote:
>>> I would like better integration with domain-specific package
>>> managers. By which I mean npm (for node.js), gem (for ruby), pip
>>> (for python), cpan (for perl), pecl/pear (for PHP), CRAN (for R),
>>> CTAN (for TeX), and many more I'm sure.
>> The problem is that some of these languages have fundamentally
>> different philosophy than Fedora and unfortunatelly it's not a
>> mix-and-match situation. That being said, there already are different
>> tools to create spec files from those upstream representations
>> (gem2spec, cpan2spec, ...)
> Yes, it is true that there sometimes is a different philosophy, but
> fundamentally is "in the eye of the beholder". If there are domain2spec
> tools available NOW, why would it not be possible technically? And if
> the non-technical philosophical differences are too big, maybe it is
> also a sign that Fedora needs to change the requirements? After all, an
> OS that does not help developers with development might not be a good
> environment to keep.
>

*It is not possible to convert the packages technically nor philosophically*

You might think million times that the sentence is not truth, but that 
is as it is. I'll give you several examples:

* Gems cannot express dependencies on system libraries such sqlite3, 
libxml2, etc.
* Gems does not undergoing legal review, i.e. you have to trust to the 
author of the gem, that the license is correct, which sadly may not true.
* Bundling, quite common phenomenon.

Just this short list of issues should be enough. It might work for you, 
when you decide to neglect all the issue mentioned above and probably 
several else, but it does not work for distribution. Sorry.


Vít


More information about the devel mailing list