Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , 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 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 CC: Charles Wilson , "Gerrit P. Haase" 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> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > 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/