[packagekit] AppInstall: Suggestion for application management with Listaller

[Anders F Björklund]

Matthias Klumpp wrote:

>> Or you could just "wrap" the applications into backend-specific
>> packages,
>> and use the regular install/uninstall procedure to avoid having two
>> sets.
> This was a suggestion from dantti, but Richard didn't like it, cause
> everything has to identify with a packageID.
> So AppInstall would need Listaller-specific PackageIDs.
> We can discuss this, but this is Richard's dicision.

If you convert the exe to rpm/deb, I don't think there's a problem.
i.e. then it would get a normal package-id for the normal backend ?

>> If you want Listaller to support both types, then it makes sense to
>> have two
>> backends there (one PackageKit, one setup.exe-runner) instead of  
>> vice-
>> versa.
> This does not match the concept of PK. A backend interfaces with the
> distribution's package manager, Listaller is only necessary for some
> specific cases. But using a custom packageID for Listaller-only  
> apps could
> be a solution.

Which is why I meant that listaller would need two types of  
applications.
Maybe you call it "engine" rather than "backend", but same difference...


> I do want to discuss including the AppManager part of Listaller in
> PackageKit. The installer part maybe later, but at time I don't  
> want this.


I suppose you could share the same app-install data, even if not using
packages. Where PackageKit would just skip any entries without a proper
package-id, since those would be for listaller only. Not sure if that
is "including", but the desktop files and icons sure are the same...

But to me that is different from including Listaller support in PK,
like making it support both "packages" and "applications" or making
it possible to have more than one backend active at the same time ?
(to allow for installing both native packages, and IPK/etc packages)


Then again, applications without packages aren't *that* much more
strange than groups without packages... (i.e. the "collections")

http://blogs.gnome.org/hughsie/2008/09/19/packagekit-collections/

So it's not *impossible* that PackageKit can handle non-package
applications with some special flag or id. But it feels hacky...

http://blogs.gnome.org/hughsie/2009/03/05/application-installing/


Basically I think there are room for both applications and packages.
And that AppDirs are the better solution, where packages don't fit ?

Where packages (and PackageKit) are nice for (system) dependencies,
but not really needed to download and run an application as a user.

--anders