Contents of /xml/htdocs/proj/en/glep/glep-0049.txt

Parent Directory Parent Directory | Revision Log Revision Log

Revision 1.4 - (hide annotations) (download)
Tue Sep 5 20:54:30 2006 UTC (12 years, 4 months ago) by g2boojum
Branch: MAIN
Changes since 1.3: +11 -4 lines
File MIME type: text/plain

1 pauldv 1.1 GLEP: 49
2     Title: Alternative Package Manager requirements
3 g2boojum 1.4 Version: $Revision: 1.3 $
4     Last-Modified: $Date: 2006/05/21 10:23:55 $
5 pauldv 1.1 Author: Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@gentoo.org>,
6 g2boojum 1.4 Status: Rejected
7 pauldv 1.1 Type: Standards Track
8     Content-Type: text/x-rst
9     Created: 18-May-2006
10 g2boojum 1.4 Post-History: 19-May-2006, 6-Sep-2006
12     Status
13     ======
15     The council rejected this GLEP in favor of starting from a package manager
16     API and requiring Gentoo package managers in the tree to support that
17     API. (That API is still pending, however.)
18 pauldv 1.1
20     Abstract
21     ========
23     This GLEP describes four classes of package managers. What the requirements for
24     them are, and what support they can receive.
27     Motivation
28     ==========
30 pauldv 1.2 To set a standard that package managers that seek Gentoo project approval and
31 pauldv 1.1 support should adhere to.
34     Rationale
35     =========
37 pauldv 1.2 Currently Portage is showing its age. The code of Portage does not seem to be
38     salvageable for new versions. As of the date of publication, there are two known
39     alternative package managers that claim a level of Portage compatibility. These
40     alternatives are `paludis`_ and `pkgcore`_. Before these alternatives are
41     developed further, a set of rules should be created to level the playing field
42     and ensuring that decisions can be made clearly.
43 pauldv 1.1
45     Backwards Compatibility
46     =======================
48     Not a problem for this GLEP. There is no previous standard as the issue did not
49     exist before. This GLEP is to prevent future compatibility issues.
52     Categories of package managers
53     ==============================
55     We distinguish four categories of package managers. While a package manager can
56     transition from one category to another, it can not be in two categories at the
57     same time. It can be in a state of transition though.
59     *Primary Package Manager*
60     There is one primary package manager. Currently this position is held by
61 pauldv 1.2 Portage. The primary package manager is assigned by the council and all
62     packages in the official tree must be installable by a usable version of the
63 pauldv 1.1 primary package manager.
65     *Candidate Primary Package Managers*
66     A candidate Primary Package Manager does aim, or show an aim, at replacing
67     the current primary package manager. At a point where the package manager is
68     deemed stable a decision must be made whether this package manager should
69 pauldv 1.2 become the new primary package manager. At that point the `Primary package
70 pauldv 1.1 manager transition phase`_ starts.
72     *Secondary Package Managers*
73     A secondary package manager is a package manager that coexists with the
74 pauldv 1.2 primary package manager, while not aiming to replace it. Examples of package
75     managers that would fall into this category are:
76 pauldv 1.1
77     - Experimental package managers. Package managers whose purpose it is to try
78     out new features.
80 pauldv 1.2 - Focused package managers. For example a package manager that allows the
81     use of RPM formatted binary packages would be an example.
83     - Alternate package managers. Package managers that aim to coexist with the
84     primary package manager. They might for example offer a nicer user
85     interface than the primary package manager (e.g. show a cow instead of
86     compilation messages).
87 pauldv 1.1
89     *Third Party Package Managers*
90     A third party package manager is any package manager that lacks recognition
91 pauldv 1.2 from Gentoo as being in any other category. A third party package manager may
92     or may not have a Gentoo package, but is not supported beyond that.
93 pauldv 1.1
95     Package manager requirements
96     ============================
98     As a package manager is in a state of higher support there are higher
99     requirements to it. The purpose of these requirements is to ensure the unity of
100     the distribution and the package tree. For this purpose it is needed that there
101 pauldv 1.3 is only one primary package manager. This is from gentoo's perspective. From a
102     user perspective it is perfectly possible to use another package
103     manager. Candidate primary package managers and secondary package managers are
104     also supported in regards to bugs etc.
105 pauldv 1.1
107 pauldv 1.2 Primary package manager requirements
108 pauldv 1.1 ------------------------------------
110     The primary package manager is the package manager that sets the standards for
111     the tree. All ebuilds in the tree must function with the primary package
112     manager. As the primary package manager sets the standard it does not have to
113 pauldv 1.3 maintain compatibility with other package managers. This does not mean that the
114     actual implementation is the standard, but that the maintainers have the ability
115     to define new standards, together with the other involved gentoo projects.
116 pauldv 1.1
117     The primary package manager does however have the responsibility that it must be
118     very stable. The primary package manager must maintain compatibility with old
119 pauldv 1.2 versions of itself for extended periods of time. This compatibility time is set
120 pauldv 1.1 by the council. The suggested time would be one year from the point that there
121     is a compatible stable version for all supported architectures.
123 pauldv 1.2 Another compatibility requirement for the primary package manager is a limited
124 pauldv 1.1 forward compatibility. It must always be possible to transition from the
125     unstable version of the primary package manager to a stable version. This may be
126     done either by first introducing reading compatibility for a new format and only
127     having write support later. Another way would be the provision of a conversion
128     tool that ensures that the on disk information maintained by the package manager
129     is supported by the stable package manager.
131 pauldv 1.3 The primary package manager maintainers further have the responsibility to allow
132     competition. This means that reasonable patches from the maintainers of
133     secondary or candidate primary package managers must be applied, given that
134     these patches are as independent of that package manager as possible.
136 pauldv 1.2 The primary package manager is maintained on official Gentoo infrastructure,
137     under control of Gentoo developers.
138 pauldv 1.1
140 pauldv 1.2 Candidate primary package manager requirements
141 pauldv 1.1 ------------------------------------------------
143     A candidate primary package manager aims to replace the primary package
144     manager. The council is responsible for deciding whether this is done. The
145     requirements are there to ensure that it is actually possible to transition a
146     candidate primary package manager into the primary package manager.
148     First of all, there must exist a transition path. This means that the on disk
149     data of the primary package manager can be used by (or converted to a format
150     usable by) the candidate primary package manager.
152     Second, there must be a test path. It must be possible for the developers to
153     test out the candidate primary package manager on their working systems. This
154     means that the transition path must exist. This also means that there are no
155 pauldv 1.2 serious obstacles for reverting to the current primary package manager. This
156     reverting must also be usable when it is decided that the candidate will not
157     become primary package manager, for example because serious design flaws or bugs
158     were found. Ideally, the Candidate Primary Package Manager and the Primary
159     Package Manager can be installed simultaneously. If not, clear instructions must
160     be provided for both ways of transitioning.
161 pauldv 1.1
162     Third, there must exist an ebuild test path. It must be possible for package
163     managers to test ebuilds in one tree for both the primary as well as the
164     candidate primary package manager. It is not an issue if this requires a special
165     mode for the candidate primary package manager. It is not an issue either if
166 pauldv 1.2 compatibility can be achieved by having the candidate primary package manager
167     unmerge the package.
168 pauldv 1.1
169     Fourth, there must be support. This means that the package manager is actively
170 pauldv 1.2 maintained under control of Gentoo. If it is not maintained on Gentoo
171 pauldv 1.1 infrastructure, the means must be there to move the package manager, with its
172 pauldv 1.2 change history, to Gentoo infrastructure. This means that it must be maintained
173     on a Gentoo supported versioning system, or on a version system whose history
174     can be converted to a Gentoo supported versioning system.
176     Fifth, release capabilities. There must exist automated tools that use the
177     candidate primary package manager to create release media that have similar
178     capabilities as those released using the old primary package manager. The exact
179     requirements are determined by the Release Engineering project, but should not
180     be significantly beyond what is currently implemented using the primary package
181     manager.
182 pauldv 1.1
184 pauldv 1.2 Secondary package manager requirements
185 pauldv 1.1 --------------------------------------
187     A secondary package manager is a package manager that instead of directly aiming
188 pauldv 1.2 at replacing the current primary package manager as primary package manager aims
189     to cooperate with the primary package manager. As such a secondary package
190 pauldv 1.1 manager does not set the standard on the tree, but follows the standard set by
191     the primary package manager.
193     There are two kinds of secondary package managers. The first kind is formed by
194     those that do not maintain their own installed package database, but work with
195     the package database of the primary package manager. While these package
196     managers can put additional information in the database, these entries must
197     remain compatible with the primary package managers. Verification, reference,
198     and deinstallation by the primary package manager must remain functional.
200     The second kind is formed by those package managers that maintain their own
201     package database, or a package database incompatible with the primary package
202     manager. To ensure the secondary role of these package managers the support in
203 pauldv 1.3 the tree for these package managers is provided along with restrictions.
204 pauldv 1.1
205     The first restriction is that no packages in the tree must rely on the secondary
206     package manager. While packages may provide a level of support (while being
207     compatible with the primary package manager) this may not result in a
208 pauldv 1.2 significant increase of features. If this were allowed, this would mean that
209 pauldv 1.1 while they technically work with the primary package manager, there would be
210     significant incentive to use the secondary package manager. As the use of this
211 pauldv 1.2 secondary package manager disallows the parallel use of the primary package
212 pauldv 1.1 manager, this would result in users using the secondary package manager as their
213     primary package manager.
215 pauldv 1.2 Users are allowed to make their own choices. However by making the tree favour a
216 pauldv 1.1 package manager that is not the primary package manager, this will lead to the
217 pauldv 1.2 secondary package manager becoming the effective primary package manager. As
218     this will be a decision by default instead of a conscious choice by the council,
219 pauldv 1.1 this is an undesirable result.
221     There is one exclusion for the restriction of packages that only work with or
222     have significant improvements with the secondary package manager. That is
223     packages that by their nature are only usable with this secondary package
224 pauldv 1.2 manager. An example would be a graphical front-end to the secondary package
225 pauldv 1.1 manager.
227     If a secondary package manager works along the primary package manager, but by
228     itself does not have the capabilities of becoming a primary package manager the
229     risks of choice by default are lower. As a result, the council could choose to
230     allow the inclusion of packages that work only or significantly better with this
231     secondary package manager. For example at a point where there is a stable,
232     functional, package manager that can handle RPM format packages, the council
233     could decide to include these packages directly in the tree, instead of using
234     wrapper scripts for those packages that are only provided in the RPM
235     format. Such a decision does imply that the maintainers of the primary package
236     manager must take this secondary package manager into account.
239 pauldv 1.2 Third party package manager requirements
240 pauldv 1.1 ----------------------------------------
242     A third party package manager is just that. It is a package manager without any
243 pauldv 1.2 support within Gentoo. As there is no control by Gentoo over the package manager
244 pauldv 1.1 this means that there are no requirements on the package manager.
246 pauldv 1.2 This complete lack of control however also translates to the fact that Gentoo
247 pauldv 1.1 can not make package manager specific changes to support this package
248     manager. Package manager specific means that it is possible to request changes
249     that make the tree more independent of the primary package manager. These
250     changes must however be agnostic of the package manager, and only make it easier
251     to have alternative package managers.
254 pauldv 1.2 Transition phases
255 pauldv 1.1 =================
257 pauldv 1.2 Primary package manager transition phase
258 pauldv 1.1 ----------------------------------------
260     A candidate primary package manager can be chosen to become primary package
261 pauldv 1.3 manager. This can only happen by council decision. This decision can only be
262     made when the candidate primary package manager is stable on all stable
263     architectures. (all architectures except experimental ones). There is a
264     incubation period of at least 3 months before a candidate primary package
265     manager can become the primary package manager.
266 pauldv 1.1
267     After the decision has been made to replace the primary package manager, the
268     transition phase starts. The use of the old stable package manager must remain
269     supported for a period of 6 months. This means that core packages must be
270     installable by this package manager. Further the possibility to convert the
271     system automatically to the new primary package manager must be available for at
272     least 18 months, but preferably longer (enable installing the new package
273     manager from the old one).
275     During the transition phase packages are allowed in the tree that use the new
276     features of the new primary package manager. While backward compatibility with
277     the previous primary package manager must be maintained a forward compatibility
278     is no longer needed.
281     Secondary package manager to candidate primary package manager transition
282     -------------------------------------------------------------------------
284     The transition from secondary package manager to candidate primary package
285     manager is straightforward. The secondary package manager must satisfy all
286     requirements for a candidate primary package manager. At that point its
287     maintainers can announce that they are changing the status to candidate primary
288 pauldv 1.2 package manager. This allows a greater support from Gentoo in achieving that
289 pauldv 1.1 goal.
292     Third party to other transition
293     -------------------------------
295     When a third party package manager wants to transition into one of the other
296     categories (except primary package manager) it must satisfy all requirements for
297     that category.
300     References
301     ==========
303     .. _paludis: http://paludis.berlios.de/
304     .. _pkgcore: http://gentooexperimental.org/~ferringb/bzr/pkgcore/
305     .. _Open Publication License: http://www.opencontent.org/openpub/
308     Copyright
309     =========
311     This document is copyright 2006 by Paul de Vrieze and licensed under the
312     `Open Publication License`_.

  ViewVC Help
Powered by ViewVC 1.1.20