The general theme is that Debian development methods are antiquated, and the decentralized nature of the Debian development process creates headaches for developers. Stapelberg's detailed commentary is organized by topic:
- Change process: He writes, "While it is great to have a lint tool (for quick, local/offline feedback), it is even better to not require a lint tool at all. The team conducting the change (e.g., the C++ team introduces a new hardening flag for all packages) should be able to do their work transparent to me."
- Fragmented workflow and infrastructure: "Debian generally seems to prefer decentralized approaches over centralized ones…non-standard hosting options are used rarely enough to not justify their cost, but frequently enough to be a huge pain when trying to automate changes to packages."
- Package Uploads: Package uploads occur through a system of batch jobs. Stapelberg claims that, depending on timing, you might wait for over seven hours before your package is actually installable.
- Bug tracker: The Debbugs bug tracker was created in 1994 and lacks some important features available with contemporary tools.
- Email archive: Stapelberg laments that Debian still doesn't have a conveniently browsable threaded archive of mailing list discussions.
- Machine readability: According to Stapelberg, "While it is obviously possible to deal with Debian packages programmatically, the experience is far from pleasant."
沒有留言:
張貼留言