Wit Wilinski madman at
Mon Aug 15 22:32:14 CEST 2005

On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 22:18:03 +0200
Nicolas Masse <masse_nicolas at> wrote:

> The problem here is that it will require lots of work to get all these binary packages up-to-date. In order to reduce this, we can perhaps just build some of these depending on their dependencies. (In fact I don't really like being distros-based). The installer can then fetch the binary package which fits the bests with the system he is on. 
> Benedikt speak also about a way to register each goodie in the local package management systems. When it can be nice, I hope you also tought to the fact that if the user use then his local package management system to remove this goodie, the installer must also be able to see that this one was removed. (In fact I'm not a fan of distro-based packages managment systems, at least for desktops) I think the best is to keep a trace of the files who were installed so that the installer can remove them later.

What if we just had binary plugins instead of packages? The
goodie-manager would check if compilation is possible - if not, it'd
try to find the best binary plugin for the user's system? Using local
package management system would make the case a lot more complicated
(and a bit system-dependant). I think that listing several goodies in
the package database is a bit overhead. It could be misleading too -
the user could be confused, where to delete the plugin: in the goodie
manager or in the package manager.

just my $0.02
BTW. if the goodies manager will be written in python/pygtk, i'd like
to help, also ;)

[ JID: madman at ] [ ]
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the Xfce4-dev mailing list