Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID:	<3BF44D66.A282870F@wapme-systems.de>
Date:	Fri, 16 Nov 2001 00:19:02 +0100
From:	Stipe Tolj <tolj AT wapme-systems DOT de>
Organization:	Wapme Systems AG
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.7 [de]C-CCK-MCD QXW0322b (WinNT; I)
X-Accept-Language:	de,en
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	Robert Collins <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
CC:	Charles Wilson <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>,
	"Gerrit P. Haase" <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject:	Re: new site for my ports is up
References:	<5314439342 DOT 20011114212805 AT familiehaase DOT de> <3BF2D797 DOT B0481987 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20011114211942 DOT GB9636 AT redhat DOT com> <1119104841 DOT 20011114224550 AT familiehaase DOT de> <3BF2F6AD DOT 726DB93E AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <3BF3C5A2 DOT 7F7907B8 AT wapme-systems DOT de> <05cc01c16e24$2e03bf00$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks>

> The site maintenance is actually pretty automatic now. Copy the file to
> the location, it's included. Delete the file, it's removed. Hmm that's
> easy :}.

yes, considered in the raw uploading semantic. But what about
regression testing and file conflicts. Basicly we tread tarballs as
black-boxes without knowing (exactly) if the included files may mess
up a installation/package in some way.

> >   1) supporting the (new) users the best way to get what they want,
> > aka "has someone ported foobar already to Cygwin?!"
> 
> Chris has this already - he generates an automatic list of packages on
> the cygwin site. See this list a few days back IIRC.

I can't find that, what subject was the thread running under?

> >   2) support the pacakge maintainers, i.e. by having a reference of
> > all used files and possible file conflicts within a database on the
> > site. A package maintainer should be able to "check-in" a new release
> > and roll a regression test on it before it gets publicaly available
> > and integrated to setup.ini.
> 
> Hmm, I don't agree. See my point about conflicts. Conflicts are normal,
> and to be expected. There is no point getting all automated about
> detecting conflicts in packages until setup.exe can prevent the users
> installing those conflicting packages. Until that point, a check every
> month or three will probably suffice. An automated check on the package
> when it is put into the repository would also be great, but that takes
> tuit and I can think of other things that I'd like Chris to tuit before
> this (winsup/utils breakout specifically).

I agree, a fully automated procedure is not what I'm intending, but a
automation _support_.


Stipe

tolj AT wapme-systems DOT de
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Wapme Systems AG

Münsterstr. 248
40470 Düsseldorf

Tel: +49-211-74845-0
Fax: +49-211-74845-299

E-Mail: info AT wapme-systems DOT de
Internet: http://www.wapme-systems.de
-------------------------------------------------------------------
wapme.net - wherever you are

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -