Re: Thesis

[Scott Shawcroft]

Henk,
This is a problem I have been fixing with the help of others from the Arch community.  Right now its:
current: core + extra + community
future: testing
experimental: none

I plan on fixing this to:
current: core + extra + community
future: core + extra + community + testing

Thanks for the input and I'm glad you like the site.
~Scott

On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 2:54 AM, Henk van de Kamer <he...@vandekamer.com> wrote:

Hi,

I've seen your website [2] and read part of your thesis. Impressing
work! I think most distributions wants to keep track of software
versions and this could be a central place. It could become a very
important project...

I wondered why Arch Linux (arch) had a much higher percentage of obsolte
in future than in current. If I understood that part of your thesis
correct, I think that you made a wrong assumption there:

"Arch Arch is a smaller distribution which does rolling releases using
its Pacman package manager to distribute binary packages. Four different
repositories are crawled. The core and extra repositories are grouped
under the current branch. The testing repository is considered the
future versions and lastly the community repository is the experimental
branch."


The testing branch contains only newer packages awaiting a release. So
that branch is only a very small part of the complete project. The
community branch only contains contributed software and also lacks -- as
far as I know -- the packages in core and extra. So IMHO the correct
figures would be obtained if yoy do it like this:

current:      core + extra
future:       core + extra + testing
experimental: core + extra + testing + community

--

Henk van de Kamer
http://www.vandekamer.com/


P.S.
Al mijn e-mail is digitaal ondertekend om mij zo te beschermen tegen
identiteitsdiefstal. Mocht uw mailprogramma hier niet goed mee overweg
kunnen, lees dan mijn uitleg [1]. Sorry voor de overlast, maar in de
toekomst zal u waarschijnlijk ook uw e-mail willen beschermen...

[1] http://www.hetlab.tk/artikelen/digitale-handtekening
[2] http://oswatershed.org/