[Gpg4win-devel] claws extensions

[Bernhard Reiter]

On Dienstag, 14. Oktober 2008, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> > given that claws grows in complexity, at one point in the future we
> > should consider a seperate claws installer that needs Gpg4win-X to do
> > crypto.

> In addition to what Werner said, what you propose only makes sense if
> a proper packaging system is used that can automatically resolve such
> dependencies, and then all of gpg4win should be split into individual
> packages, much like Debian, but with a simpler GUI.

I am not worried about size, I am worried about complexity.
(Also Kleopatra will get small once we apply optimisation to the build.)
Defining large packages with one easy requirement 
can be done without package management.

> Picking out claws is not a good idea: There are many technical reasons
> against splitting it out, given the current installer technology, and
> the same reasons keep Kleopatra in as well, despite its size and the
> fact that it is the only component in gpg4win that actually comes with
> an alternative (GPA).  There is no other free e-mail program in
> gpg4win right now.

A gpg4win without GPA and with Claws split out, 
would be a much more canonical package.
Again, this is to be kept in mind for the future, not for now
especially if complexity of Claws grows.

> Also, claws is the only third party project that voluntarily works on
> improving gpg4win, without having a $$$ contract. 

Several people have over time helped the gpg4win packaging effort as part of 
the community. Also having a paid contract is something good, not bad.

> We are free-riding on claws' contributions,

I strongly disagree. There is no "free-riding" from the gpg4win community,
we are doing our share for our motives which is normal for free software 
communities.

> and kicking them out would send completely the wrong message.  
> You know how this would look, even if you don't mean it that way. 

I never suggested "kicking" Claws, I am thinking about how to get a good 
maintainable product to potential users. Claws profits from this thinking
as well as Gpg4win. A better package definition might help both pieces of 
software.

> Instead, we should make a donation, IMO.  Colin has 
> helped to make gpg4win 2.0 a much better and more finished product.

Well, as Intevation we voluntarily pay (not donate - an imporant difference)
for Free Software that is useful for us or our projects. We aim to do this 
in the range of 1% of the project sum in total for all helpful components,
so we will consider it. I suggest for g10code to do the same. :)

As wrote in the other email: 
Colin, I really like and appreciate your contributions
to Claws and to Gpg4win!

> If there is a group that dislikes having diversity, 

Let me just state for the record: I like diversity!
Of course I also like good products.

> A major project could be a redesign of gpg4win to make it more modular
> and easier extensible.  

My gut feeling is that we will be stuck with making a judgement call
what to include for quite a while.

> But, to do it right, this would IMO mean to 
> port dpkg and apt-get to windows.  There already are similar projects
> out there, but I did not inspect them.  MSI, by the way, could replace
> the dpkg part of the equation, but not the apt-get part.  It would be
> critical to find broad support among free software ports to windows
> for such a solution, so that it would be a one-stop platform.

I was at this point as well. A few thoughts about this have been exchanged
on the public kde-windows list, without real conclusion. Note that the problem 
got into another level with something like KDE to get into Windows.

> Actually, to me this sounds like something that GNOME and KDE should
> sort out among themselves, maybe as part of freedesktop, and then
> gpg4win could just ride the wave.  I don't know if there are already
> such efforts.  The GNOME and KDE platforms are much bigger, and there
> should be larger pressure for them to come up with a solution.  How do
> all the programs get to share glib and dbus?  When we know the answer
> to that one, we may be smarter.

With a few things I believe Intevation and g10code are at the forefront
of makeing up their mind (at least we are Free Software full-time
professionals for quite while), so our input for this discussion certainly
is appreciated, so thanks for your comments.

Bernhardd

-- 
Managing Director - Owner: www.intevation.net      (Free Software Company)
Germany Coordinator: fsfeurope.org. Coordinator: www.Kolab-Konsortium.com.
Intevation GmbH, Osnabrück, DE; Amtsgericht Osnabrück, HRB 18998
Geschäftsführer Frank Koormann, Bernhard Reiter, Dr. Jan-Oliver Wagner
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 1603 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.wald.intevation.org/pipermail/gpg4win-devel/attachments/20081014/13194f99/smime.bin