[csw-maintainers] [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs tetex

Philip Brown phil at bolthole.com
Mon Oct 11 06:18:19 CEST 2010

On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski
<maciej at opencsw.org> wrote:
> No dia 8 de Outubro de 2010 00:19, Peter FELECAN
> <pfelecan at opencsw.org> escreveu:
>> Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> writes:
>>> you'll just have to be creative about name collision on the existing
>>> one.
>> newchkpkg
>> superchkpkg
>> &c
> I was thinking about just upgrading checkpkg to the newer version.
> The current version (the one in GAR) is a functional superset of the
> old version (the one in CSWcswutils).  If there are parts of
> infrastructure other than GAR that depend on checkpkg's interface
> (which has changed slightly), we can review the requirements and
> implement backward-compatibility mode.
> Are there any parts of infrastructure that depend on checkpkg from CSWcswutils?

side comment, semi-related.
I think it might be nice to separate out the python depending stuffs,
into a new package.

not sure what to call it though.

oh btw you already have an "older" version of your python-based checkpkg.
you just keep it at the library level, as "checkpkg.py", it seems like?

or, contrariwise, I wouldnt object to even doing things the opposite
way, and splitting out my "older" stuff, into a differently named,
non-python-depending package.

upgrade paths might get a bit hairy on that though.

> _______________________________________________
> maintainers mailing list
> maintainers at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
> .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.

More information about the maintainers mailing list