Re: Initial run of ./bin/dbupdate fails.

[bill-auger]

On Sun, 16 Oct 2022 19:48:32 -0700 (PDT) Art@TheTroyPress.com
wrote:
> AND I appreciate your saying that it's not impossible for Python

packaging mediagoblin is feasible for a combination of two
reasons - firstly, because python is so popular (and because
distro maintainers care about reproducibility and
accountability), most common python libraries are already
packaged in distros - such that secondly, if an application's
developers are reasonably conservative about "heaping on
dependencies", few or no additional python libraries need to be
packaged, in order to support that application

i counted, of the 15 i mentioned, it was actually only 4 truly
new ones


On Sun, 16 Oct 2022 19:48:32 -0700 (PDT) Art@TheTroyPress.com
wrote: 
> Another problem, by the way, is coders nearly never bother with 
> installation issues - they far too often see it as someone else's problem. 

it is not seen as anyone problem - to a web developer,
installation is trivial: `python setup install` or `bundle
install` - that will pull everything but the kitchen sink from
the internet, and install and configure it all, in one simple
command - usually one only needs to prime the database afterward
and start the server

the problem is that it is too easy - no one ever looks at the
source code or licenses - not users, not the application
developers, not even the maintainers of the third-party
repositories - those packages are not vetted by anyone, other
than the individual package uploaders, who are most often
completely anonymous pseudonyms with no identity or contact info


On Sun, 16 Oct 2022 19:48:32 -0700 (PDT) Art@TheTroyPress.com
wrote:
> Question: Do you think it's possible that the Python folks could compel 
> their community - such as the folks who run package sites like pypi.org - 
> to provide their FOSS packages in a license permits then to be put in 
> someone else's package, such as GMG?
 
i am not optimistic about that - the most likely solution would
be for GNU to host specially curated repos, excluding anything
ugly; but that would be a ton of work and no one really wants to
do it - but package management should be a distro concern -
that is what distros do - it is precisely what distros _are_
- as i explained, those TPPMs are ideal for windows users; but
they are a nuisance for *nix systems, like a 5th wheel

also FWIW, python is only the tip of the iceberg - there are many
similar package managers, at least one for each popular
interpreted language - of the ones i researched, only the
haskell repos have a GNU-acceptable licensing policy

https://labs.parabola.nu/issues/1035