[petsc-users] petsc externalpackage directory

[Barry Smith]

> On Feb 2, 2016, at 10:29 PM, Jed Brown <jed at jedbrown.org> wrote:
> 
> Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> writes:
>>> I'd rather cache
>>> the tarballs (with checksum) or use git repositories (which can be
>>> reliably cleaned)
>> 
>>  Ok then you write the code to do this. It doesn't currently exist
>>  (and I am not sure we want to be in the business of writing a full
>>  package management system :-).
> 
> Aren't we deleting the tarballs now "to save storage"?  I don't want to
> add yet another configuration option for users to read (it's irrelevant
> for 99% of them anyway).  The problem with too many configuration
> options is that people give up on reading --help before finding the part
> that documents something they want.
> 
>>   Anybody who thinks that a computer system that doesn't allow direct
>>   downloads of open source tarballs or git repositories (because of
>>   security considerations) but allows people to indirectly download
>>   those exact same tarballs or git repositories (as if that indirect
>>   download somehow magically cleanses the tarballs or repositories)
>>   is a damn fool anyways.
> 
> Which is why I'm not motivated to add complicated features to
> facilitate.  Employees need to complain about asinine policies they are
> forced to work around.

   But in your previous email you seemed to advocate exactly that. You said 

I'd rather cache
the tarballs (with checksum) or use git repositories (which can be
reliably cleaned) 

isn't that adding "complicated features to facilitate"