Posted by: Anonymous
on January 14, 2009 01:55 AM
"It's very sad to see that the Linux world is still stuck with this crap and still attempting to create the Yet Another Ultimate Package Manager because they're incapable of defining a platform."
This is about the only sensible thing anyone here (incl. the article) has said.
There also needs to be some discussion of who the audience is for any given packaging approach. Repositories and apt/yum are fine for trained sysadmin and dedicated tinkerer types. But they leave any would-be ISVs (learn that term and love it, folks) without any clear idea of of the software landscape occupied by their would-be target users... i.e. this nebulous 'Linux' thing lacks a stable platform where the app developer and end-user can meet (and where the developer can provide formal tech support without getting hopelessly bogged down in variability between distros).
I like Google Android for this reason: Its a true platform (containing Linux) that gives the user interface and programming interface equal weight. ISVs know they can confidently develop for it, using the supplied SDK as a reference/starting point, and also be able to lead the users through a predictable environment (i.e. provide effective support).
Note that TFA didn't even mention LSB. That should be impossible in an article about a new package manager for a particular platform. But the community here (geeks and other die-hards) just don't get it, and don't want to think about PC platforms, which are mainly commitments made by OSes to end-users and app developers that allow the two groups to use the system together without being managed by the OS vendor.
In short, these people get the personal computer concept even less than the purveyors of commercial Unix did.