On Mon, Jul 16, 2007 at 10:03:23PM +0200, Tobias C. Rittweiler wrote:
othyro@freeshell.org writes:
Ahh, then it would make sense to have two packages for slime in pkgsrc: slime (for formal releases) and slime-devel for whenever the last time the maintainer updated the CVS tree.
Actually I'd rather recommend providing two packages in the following way: One "for whenever the last time the maintainer [of the port] updated the CVS tree", and one which automatically pulls and installs CVS HEAD.
I don't believe either pkgsrc HEAD or wip automagically pull information to generate Makefiles, sha1 and rmd160 hashes for distinfos, or other files from any sites. I'm not sure how secure that would be in the end. pkgsrc maintainers, please correct this if incorrect. Also, the model you present removes a stable branch from the tree, which we would obviously need if this package makes it into HEAD to track and address bugs.
Not sure how the PRs for -devel packages are addressed. If i were to conjecture though, i'd say it goes something like: (1) PR (2) maintainer updates CVS (3) asks submitter if `make clean; cvs update -dP; make depend; make; make install` fixes problem (4) failing #3, maintainer recommends submitter contact package author.
This way there's an easy way for your people to perform the action they're most probably confronted with when facing a problem: viz. get the HEAD version.
Releases only happen on a full noon night at a 29. February.
Or some such.
-T.
I wouldn't be opposed to regenerating a Makefile and distinfo weekly for the root.tar.gz file of your current CVS for a slime-devel package; however, it would seemingly make it easier to track bugs across combinations of 14+ operating systems and 50+ ports if regular releases were made to a stable branch. This is probably more work than desired for some, so it's only a suggestion.
CC'ing this to pkgsrc-wip-discuss as well, as it seems relevant. If someone on that list complains, i'll stop doing that.