02:34 pm
[Link] |
What open source on windows needs: A Distro
Leonard Ritter (of Aldrin fame) has written an article about Proprietary File Formats And A Solution. It covers the important issue of overcoming the momentum of proprietary file formats. It also reminded me of several issues open source on windows has that it doesn't on Linux.
Firefox introduced an automatic update feature in version 1.5, also OpenOffice 2.1 has update notification on by default and Gaim has it in a plugin but disabled by default, Java has an update facility and many proprietary apps have an update check in the main application or as a tray icon or both.
Most of these have LUA or "Limited User Account" bugs (For details on LUA, check out Aaron Margosis' Blog) of one form or another in a personal desktop (I'll also cover the managed desktop case further down). You'll either get notified about updates you don't have priveleges to install, errors from failed update attempts because of lack of priveleges or not know there are updates available because you don't have priveleges to install them. All are a problem and highlight the need for a unified update check/notify/installation service. Why should every project need to build an update mechanism?
The next problem is already partially solved. TheOpenCD, TheOpenSourceFreeCD, TTCS OSSWIN and OSSCD as a whole include just about everything so you don't have to download firefox, thunderbird, openoffice, 7zip, pdfcreator, putty, ultravnc, vlc, tortoisesvn, java, azureus, jedit, gtk+, gimp, gaim (without gtk), inkscape (oops, that has gtk in the installer too but won't be installed because you already have gtk), audacity, filezilla, blender, eclipse, etc. individually. But they don't do anything to support you like a regular distro on Linux does. When there are updates you have to install them manually, and there isn't any integration and testing done between individual pieces of software.
Now we have the packages we want in a distro from one place. Add wpkg, a mailing list, forum, ticket system, developers and users and you now have the beginning of a windows distribution. Next all of the packages need to be converted to an open source installer that generates MSI package files.
Why .msi? Because most enterprises use .msi files to distribute software to their windows systems. Sure you can paddle upstream by insisting on .exe installers and wpkg, but it is not a flexible all-encompasing patch management system it can be. That may be a direction to take the wpkg project, but we aren't there today.
So let's make a Distro for Windows. What should it be named? Who is interested?
Tags: open_source_windows, osscd, proprietary_file_formats, theopencd, theopensourcefreecd, ttcs osswin, unified_software_update_on_windows, windows_distribution, windows_lua_bugs, wpkg
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
mfedyk's journal
