Bad practices from competitors

[Camille Moulin]

On 16/05/2020 11:10, Narcis Garcia wrote:
> [...]
> Package for more root families, such as Ubuntu instead of Mint, Debian
> instead of Ubuntu. Same on Red Hat instead of CentOS or Fedora. This
> way, a project can deploy repositories for 1 or 2 distros with
> consistent and compatible dependencies of basic/LTS distro versions.

The only packages that are done currently by the kdenlive core team are
the ones in the PPAs I think. So it's already rather "generic"  (ubuntu,
mint, elementary, etc.)

> [...]
> Develop and package with better LTS~like dependencies instead of
> requiring too specific MLT/Qt versions. 

That's very hard to do.

For Qt, I don't think the requirements are too "bleeding edge" : current
Qt is 5.14, kdenlive only requires Qt 5.7 (that's 2016, 4 years ago)

For MLT, the situation is very different : Kdenlive's devs are actually
fixing things in MLT on a regular basis. So there is no other way than
to have an up to date version of MLT if you want to offer correct
behaviour to your users.

> This also allows:
> 1. Package only project's software instead of distributing MLT/Qt,
> because last ones are already well distributed with OS repositories.

Well, that depends (cf. supra). But, yes I agree that better
synchronization with downstream packagers is necessary: the problem is
it requires people to step up to do that. Any help is appreciated :-)


> [...]
> This isolation walks contrary to systems integration and administration
> tasks and automation, and isolates from package managers as a trusted
> "stores" where get apps from.

I very much agree with that, and I'm not very fond of it in theory, but
I have to admit it fixes real-life problems.

Cheers,

Camille