Platonides <platonides(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> It's not only a question of space, but also of
> I don't know about Debian or Solaris, but on Fedora some
> packages are sent to a farm up north when they don't compile
> in the current release and noone volunteers to fix it. I
> wouldn't want the admins in this case to work on such prob-
> lems if there is no existing demand.
> I'm more optimistic regarding the abilities
of the tool-
> server users - if someone can write "import x" or "use y;"
> they should be able to copy and paste that to another file.
> And if they don't, that'd be a nice opportunity to ask for
> and share some knowledge.
That assumes they know what they are doing, instead of
copy&pasting recipes. I know that's not true for many toolserver
users, where we have very valued developers.
But I'm sure there is also a bunch of people which copied pywikipediabot
following some instructions, and are only experts on its command line.
Don't misinterpret me, I'm not meaning that they shouldn't have an
account in the TS, or that they are second-class users. It's good to
have them on board, each one has its own know-how, very much as not
every php coder is a perl guru. But not everyone has the experience to
identify the dependencies of what they're doing.
Now you've scared me :-). In an ideal world I'd solve this
by packaging pywikipediabot in the usual way so that the
users would just have to declare their dependency on it, and
someone experienced could make sure that only a) one b) cur-
rent and c) secure snapshot is used.
And then, even for those writing their own scripts,
having to copy the
requisites to a separate file and keeping them up-to-date is a
burdensome task. I prefer the autodetection way as far as it's possible
(which in most cases looks simple).
As long as the user can specify additional dependencies,
sure, why not.