My Devuan package curated list.
directions(biases)
- desktop enviroment agnostic . I favor packages that dont integrate too much with a certain desktop enviroment.
- lightweight (in computer resources) . (i wonder if scalable would be a more elaborate expectation)
- stable . By stable i mean core functionality that persists in time honoring a core set of user expectations. Also i prefer software that dont break with newer versions that expectations. There is a delicate balance between extremes of constant change to get onboard the hype-fomo-attentiongrabing-train that can be translated more propably to some monetary influx and the eternal-death-freeze. Put it another way , newer realeased version should NOT break current established user workflows. Ironically a newer shiny released package that wont honor that , could end be less desired! Too much hyperbole in sexiness - could make you stand out from the crowd but risking to be undesired the same time for workflow intergration. Moderated sexiness reflects a balancing of those conflicting traits (standing out vs workflow intergration(tradition)).
- distro aligned-intergration. A packaged software should aling and respect the install- update - upgrade workflows of Devuan. Many wellknown programs tend to have their own update,install workflow and their own addons-plugins-packages repositories (emacs,firefox,oolite,clisp,python,weechat etc). And many software offer versions in thirdparty installer formats. So a user could end in the worst case managing many packaging-lifecycle workflows with different depedence management, securiry processes etc.Even if Devuan allows per-application package management a question emerges of coordination and automatation of these. In that case apt would elevate its status to a meta-package-manager. There is a tension that can be seen and in the windows-land. Should a user prefer apps from microsoft store or standalone installers? Ironically while as devuan (libre-initfree distro) user i would tent to prefer distro aligned packages as a window user i tend to prefer third-party and standalone packages .Why? As a windows user i want to 'break'- misalign with the established semantics workflows of the window-land ? Why would i want to do that?? To access better hardware functionality? Play better games? . Bring foreing workflows in windowland ?
- libre-open hardware aligned . I prefer packaged software that intergrates and workswell with hardware that if not open itself has libre-open drivers.Of course that requirement should first exercised in the hardware we choose...
So here is my curated list. Of Devuan/debian packages that i tend to use more often and i think the align with my various biases.
TUI oriented
ncal
command line callendar
backup
rsnapshop
DevuanPackageInfo / rsnapshot @
source editors
emacs
Emacs relies on package repositories to enhance it's functionality. Emacs has its own workflow to install , update packaged-functionality. And what is the alternatively? I think the best practical solution would be the emacs package manager to be intergradable to the host package management. So for example initiating a devuan host system update would also initiate an emacs's package manager update. Also there could be workflow tags to express depedencies that act across all the app's package managers. A semantical integrated system-wide functionality-workflow manager could be a solution from this micromanagement predicament.And i can think at least a reason. An emacs package cound introduce conflicts in the systemwide keys sharing. It could be usefull for a systemwide package manager to resolve such conflicts .
file manager
xfe
A file manager is a common component of any user workflow.