Hi again,
intrigeri wrote (02 Apr 2011 14:09:57 GMT) :
>> considering that .deb packages might be obtained at
>> https://launchpad.net/~robert-ancell/+archive/lightdm
> Nice to see third-party Debian packages are already being worked on.
> This is only a very small step on the road to "being usable in
> Tails", though: for maintainability and security reasons, we don't
> want to use/trust more and more third-party APT repositories and
> package maintainers -aside of the Debian ones- than we currently do.
> I've not checked what the quality of these packages is yet. Do these
> packages depend on stuff that is not in Debian Squeeze, or likely to
> be hard to get into squeeze-backport?
> If you decide to go the lightdm way, someone (either you or someone
> else) will definitely need to do whatever is needed so that we can use
> it in Tails:
> 0. Make sure lightdm works on Debian Squeeze.
> 1. Fill a RFP Debian bug (is there already one?)
> 2. Find a Debian Developer or Maintainer willing to upload and
> maintain the lightdm package in Debian, including
> squeeze-backports; if needed, help making the currently existing
> packages good enough for this to happen.
> If you don't include this as part of your GSoC work, it means at the
> end of the summer, your results won't be usable in Tails unless
> someone catches the ball and deals with it. While this is not
> necessarily a blocker, it would for sure make a lightdm-based proposal
> less appealing to us. By writing this, I really don't want to
> discourage you from using lightdm as a basis: I nevertheless have to
> show you the big picture your proposal is supposed to integrate into.
Ubuntu Natty actually has a lightdm package [0].
[0]
http://packages.ubuntu.com/natty/lightdm
This is the reassuring part.
On the other hand:
* lightdm build-depends on libwebkitgtk-dev; this may be needed only
for the lightdm-theme-webkit binary package, but nevertheless
makes it painful to maintain backports for Debian Squeeze (or any
currently shipped distribution with long-term support actually).
* lightdm build-depends on valac-0.12 (only in Debian experimental).
* While lightdm seems like a really promising piece of software, its
bugs list [1] makes me think it is not very mature yet. As of
today, everything tends to show it's not been used in any
production environment yet.
[1]
https://bugs.launchpad.net/lightdm/+bugs
Max, I fear basing your proposal on lightdm could make you spend more
time working-around lightdm limitations and bugs than actually working
on the graphical boot menu Tails needs. What do you think?
Bye,
--
intrigeri <intrigeri@???>
| GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc
| OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc
| So what?
