OPM (if its included in Laz 1.8 ) will lend respectability to the ccr and other packages. Is that a good or wanted thing? Do Lazarus core developers want to field queries about packages they have no control over? If not, who will take responsibility over new additions?
Lazarus core developers have
no part in (most of) the packages in CCR. They are 3rd party packages.
The idea is to deliver 3rd party packages in an easy way.
The OPM maintainer, currently GetMem, is responsible for adding new packages. The criteria for adding should be relaxed. A maintainer's duty is not to judge the quality or usefulness of packages.
Later there will be a server side SW allowing user voting and comments. Judgement will come through user feedback.
Embraced by the Lazarus release team? OPM is kind-of pointless if it's 'just another 3rd-party package'. Will it be in the Lazarus 1.8 distribution? (spoiler: I think it should be)
Yes it will be in the next distribution. It is not a 3rd-party package, it is now in Lazarus trunk. Everything in Lazarus trunk will be in the next major release. The package manager author, GetMem, is now officially a Lazarus developer, meaning that he has commit access and communicates in the developers mailing list.
No need for the scare-quotes. Standards are necessarily arbitrary and help collaboration. How is that scary? Standards enable testing and validation - and if they are well-designed they can be automated. Standards are a way to invalidate badly-designed packages that are unsupportable.
I had no intention to insult you. I only wanted to show what is realistic and what is not.
Open source development works a little differently than commercial development.
A standard may say: "package xxx maintainer must fix bugs and make releases until he is told otherwise". In a company it works! A payed employee really does what he is told to do.
In open source, if a package's author/maintainer flees, as happened to many CCR packages, no standards requirement helps with that.
I don't pretend to have the brains nor expertise that you guys have. However I'll continue to make suggestions as long as that doesn't irritate you all too much
Writing a package specifically for OPM (Cryptini) taught me a lot about the issues from the developer's POV. As it stands, it's somewhat cumbersome - but I have faith that OPM can be slick, robust, futureproof and simple for all, given the talents of the team.
No irritation here. Suggestions are welcome. Even better, patches for the package manager in Lazarus sources are welcome throught Mantis bug tracker!
In open source a suggestion with a patch always works better.