[csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cswutils

[Peter FELECAN]

"Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski" <maciej at opencsw.org> writes:

> No dia 13 de Janeiro de 2011 08:31, Peter FELECAN
> <pfelecan at opencsw.org> escreveu:
>> Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> writes:
>>
>>> [...]
>>> If regular maintainers need to stay with 'the latest official
>>> version', then lets have 'the official version' of the scripts, etc.
>>> always properly installed on the build machines, in a single standard
>>> location, rather than making people have to locally update their own
>>> tree at random times?
>>
>> Entirely agreeing with you. What you describe is one, and not only,
>> reason for which I didn't try to adopt gar based packaging.
>
> I understand this point, however I think that central distribution
> would cause more problems than it would solve.  If we wanted to
> distribute gar centrally, we would need to package it.  If we wanted
> to install a package on the buildfarm, we would need to release it
> first.  For it to be released, it would have to be accepted and pushed
> by release manager.  Imagine a scenario in which we want to push a
> bugfix for GAR, and the release manager blocks the release, because he
> thought it would be neat to force gar package maintainter to do
> unrelated work.  It's more practical for people to update gar sources
> when they want to, rather than waiting for a release which might be
> blocked at random times.

Your remarks are right. What if we consider having exceptions for the
installation on the build farm for packages which are related to
maintenance activities and on which there are no "user" dependencies?
Gar is a good example of this class.

Back to the initial discussion, I extracted a working-copy of mgar (as
documented on the wiki). It took a loooong time and the result took up
1.4 Gb. I think that I should know better and checkout only a sub-tree
but didn't have the enough experience to know which self-sufficient part
is necessary.
-- 
Peter