[wpkg-users] distribution for windows based on winpkg?

[Rainer Meier]

Hi,

zyzy wrote:
> I was thinking about a server that host package (wpkg config+ binaties)
> with a bittorent tracker.
> integrated wpkg server.
> 
> Goal to made something like cygwin or ubuntu (but with bittorent to
> download.)

At first sight the idea might be quite nice - I even thought about such
a thing by myself once. However when you take a closer look there are
several problems which makes such a solution much less attractive.

Technical problems:
- WPKG is written in JScript, might be hard to implement Bittorrent.
Well, an external bittorrent client might be called.

- Bittorrent download might take much too long to be a practical
solution. Nobody is willing to wait for hours to install an update.
Allowing the user to work while applications are downloaded is a problem
since a user might run exactly the program to be updated a the time it
finished downloading (locked files, update problems).

- System administrators usually do not like that each client fetches its
own copy from the internet which causes lots of traffic. Yes, bittorrent
is nice to reduce load on the servers due to spreading but for a network
administrator it's the same as an HTTP/FTP download. Each client fetches
its own copy (well, at least large parts of it, some parts might be
"shared" network-internally...)

- Most companies even do not allow bittorrent ports or tracker access
due to policy reasons. Also personally I would not allow every client to
use bittorrent within my corporate network.

- Integrity: No matter if HTTP, FTP, bittorrent or any other protocol;
the problem is the same: Who wants to trust the central repository and
its contents? Checksumming might help - but who verifies the packages?


Organizational problems:
- Somebody needs to maintain the server-side packages, updates, tests.
Especially tests sometimes heavily depend on the clients used (language,
specific settings etc.)

- Options: Lots of programs come with various options for silent
installation (create symbols, install modules...). Supporting all these
options would require providing a package for each permutation of
option-combinations. Which means that there will be quite a lot of
packages for the same software. Again: Who is going to test/verify them?

- Administrators need to refer to package IDs which are stored/updated
somewhere remotely. I cannot imagine administrators fully relying on
remote package administrators - a mistake on server side could easily
bring business down by screwing up all corporate machines. There is no
such thing like a "testbed". At least not until WPKG architecture is
going to be changed quite a lot (adding package release status and the
likely). Currently WPKG also does not support defining multiple versions
of the same package on server side while the profile refers to the
specific version to be installed (might be an idea for the future by the
way).


There might be other issues but main issue is that a serious system
administrator would never ever directly leave the integrity of all
clients entirely up to an external resource. I do not deny that there
might be some insane administrators out there who would try such a
service. But seriously, I don't think it's a good idea at this moment.

Well personally I am operating multiple sites which all use the same
packages. The main difference is that I know my environment and I have
full control over the packages I am releasing within any of these sites.
WPKG perfectly allows you to create your own packages and use it within
multiple sites - but the packages currently should be local to the site
(copied to local server).

br,
Rainer