[clc-devel] External Packagers
Hello everyone, I've been implementing changes in httpup to allow syncronisation of subtrees of a repository and found out that it might be an option for us to get packages from external packagers into the CLC CVS tree. I've written a short explanation in the Wiki, find it at http://crux.fh-regensburg.de/cgi-bin/cvstrac/wiki?p=HttpupNg With such a solution, we could easily keep up with external packagers, given they provide their ports in an httpup repository. Imagine they could just submit a bug report "there's a new version of fluxbox, sync it from http://my.domain/ports/clc-upstream#fluxbox". Sidenote: We might solve the problems with 'unmaintained' with something like this. <interlude> A comment for people aware of httpup repositories: Packagers could use the following layout for their private repository: clc-upstream/ portA private/ portB portC The "supfile" for ports(8) would check out the private subtree; once a port is accepted into CLC (as externally maintained port), the maintainer moves it into clc-upstream from where the CLC maintainer syncs it to the CLC CVS tree. The maintainer can even decide to put a new version of a port into 'private' first (so people subscribing to his private collection will get the new version immediately) and move it to clc-upstream only if it has been synced. </interlude> The new version which is going to be released as httpup 0.3.0 has gone through a major refactoring, so I'd appreciate testing of the current release (2.90) very much; to do so, just update the 'version' variable in contrib/httpup (new md5: eb78e8dec74d9e9417dc19033a0ab1fe) and pkgmk -d -u (or prt-get edit httpup Pkgfile && prt-get update httpup). There might be a few minor changes before the release of 0.3.0 and a 'diff' command if I can find a good way to do it; probably not for .0 though. Comments, suggestions, ideas? Kind regards, Johannes -- Johannes Winkelmann mailto:jw@tks6.net Bern, Switzerland http://jw.tks6.net
On Sun, Mar 28, 2004 at 13:54:55 +0200, Johannes Winkelmann wrote:
Hello everyone, [...] The new version which is going to be released as httpup 0.3.0 has gone through a major refactoring, so I'd appreciate testing of the current release (2.90) very much; to do so, just update the 'version' variable in contrib/httpup (new md5: eb78e8dec74d9e9417dc19033a0ab1fe) and pkgmk -d -u (or prt-get edit httpup Pkgfile && prt-get update httpup). The new version is of course '0.2.90', not '2.90'.
jw -- Johannes Winkelmann mailto:jw@tks6.net Bern, Switzerland http://jw.tks6.net
Hello everyone,
I've been implementing changes in httpup to allow syncronisation of subtrees of a repository and found out that it might be an option for us to get packages from external packagers into the CLC CVS tree. I've written a short explanation in the Wiki, find it at http://crux.fh-regensburg.de/cgi-bin/cvstrac/wiki?p=HttpupNg CLC maintainers, could you write a short comment whether you would be in favour of a solution where external packagers are invited to provide updated versions of unmaintained ports in their private httpup repositories? They could then file a bug report with the URL and any CLC
Hey, On Sun, Mar 28, 2004 at 13:54:55 +0200, Johannes Winkelmann wrote: maintainer could sync it to CLC CVS. I'm planning to announce the next version of httpup (or at least the test version) this week, and I'd like to include this concept in the announcement if we're going to go for it. The work required for a CLC maintainer is: a) for a new port: httpup sync http://www.maol.ch/crux/ports#graphviz \ ~/crux/clc/graphviz cd ~/crux/clc cvs add graphviz cd graphviz httpup list (to get a list of files which were synced) cvs add (the files you obtained from httpup list) cvs ci -m "initial version of graphviz" cvs tag $TAG b) for an existing port httpup sync http://www.maol.ch/crux/ports#graphviz \ ~/crux/clc/graphviz cd ~/crux/clc/graphviz httpup list (see which files most be added, removed) cvs diff (optional: see what the packager did) cvs add/delete (if needed) cvs ci -m "fetch updated version for graphviz from maol" cvs tag -F $TAG I personally would like such an system, maybe even if I'm working just as maintainer for a package which is maintained by a non-CLC person. It would improve the value of the unmaintained collection and would allow us to remove ports which haven't been changed in $TIME from the repository since we're sure no one cared to update this one. And finally, people could actually contribute changes back. Comments appreciated. Regards, Johannes -- Johannes Winkelmann mailto:jw@tks6.net Bern, Switzerland http://jw.tks6.net
On 04/07/04 00:10 Johannes Winkelmann wrote:
Hey,
Hi,
On Sun, Mar 28, 2004 at 13:54:55 +0200, Johannes Winkelmann wrote: CLC maintainers, could you write a short comment whether you would be in favour of a solution where external packagers are invited to provide updated versions of unmaintained ports in their private httpup repositories? They could then file a bug report with the URL and any CLC maintainer could sync it to CLC CVS.
The work required for a CLC maintainer is: [cut]
b) for an existing port
I personally would like such an system, maybe even if I'm working just as maintainer for a package which is maintained by a non-CLC person. It would improve the value of the unmaintained collection and would allow us to remove ports which haven't been changed in $TIME from the repository since we're sure no one cared to update this one. And finally, people could actually contribute changes back.
I must confess that I was a bit confused at first with the new httpup features (apart from proxy support ;-)) and the relation between the unmaintained collection. I briefly re-read at the "Port reorganisation?" thread (jan 04) and came up with the following comments / ideas: - I'm not sure if it is a good idea to have a unmaintained collection at all, at least for me unmaintained ports are a last-resort-handle-with-care thing. - I was thinking of httpup-ng more as a way of improving the quality of /contrib: if I trust an external contributor, and I think he has some valuable port, I'd prefer to maintain the port rather than throwing it into unmaintained. Same work for me, the contributor is awarded of having his port in contrib (what an honor :)), and, most important, I bet contrib ports are a lot more tested and it's easier to have a bug report filed for a maintained collection. - Of course the above points don't necessarily collide: the new httpup can simplify syncronization operations for both collections as well, so good work! Regards, Simone -- Simone Rota WEB : http://www.varlock.com Bergamo, Italy MAIL: sip@varlock.com
Hello,
- I'm not sure if it is a good idea to have a unmaintained collection at all, at least for me unmaintained ports are a last-resort-handle-with-care thing.
Yep, I think so too. Let us remove 'unmaintained' completely. Most of these ports are available via private httpup repositories.
- I was thinking of httpup-ng more as a way of improving the quality of /contrib: if I trust an external contributor, and I think he has some valuable port, I'd prefer to maintain the port rather than throwing it into unmaintained.
I would put 'external' ports in contrib as well because IF I decide to include Johny User's port I'd test it before.
I personally would like such an system, maybe even if I'm working just as maintainer for a package which is maintained by a non-CLC person.
I've at least one port which isn't maintained by myself. I'll use httpup-ng if possible (the current packager needs to setup a httpup repository ;-) bye, danm -- Daniel Mueller Berlin, Germany (OpenPGP: 1024D/126EC290)
On Wed, Apr 07, 2004 at 00:10:38AM +0200, Johannes Winkelmann wrote: [...]
I personally would like such an system, maybe even if I'm working just as maintainer for a package which is maintained by a non-CLC person. It would improve the value of the unmaintained collection and would allow us to remove ports which haven't been changed in $TIME from the repository since we're sure no one cared to update this one. And finally, people could actually contribute changes back.
Yep, seems to be the best way to solve the unmaintained "problem", and I would spent some time and effort into solving this. After discussing this topic together with Johannes and Daniel, Johannes has prepared a short wiki page with our thoughts [1]. We would really appreciate comments from other clc maintainers. kind regards Jürgen [1] http://crux.fh-regensburg.de/cgi-bin/cvstrac/wiki?p=CollectionPolicy -- juergen.daubert@t-online.de
Hey, On Sun, Mar 28, 2004 at 13:54:55 +0200, Johannes Winkelmann wrote:
Hello everyone,
I've been implementing changes in httpup to allow syncronisation of subtrees of a repository and found out that it might be an option for us to get packages from external packagers into the CLC CVS tree. I've written a short explanation in the Wiki, find it at http://crux.fh-regensburg.de/cgi-bin/cvstrac/wiki?p=HttpupNg I've added a transcription of a complete update session for httpup ports to http://crux.fh-regensburg.de/cgi-bin/cvstrac/wiki?p=HttpupNg. Please have a look and comment.
Regards, Johannes P.S. Those checking the timeline will probably realize that I did this _after_ the bluefish update ;-) -- Johannes Winkelmann mailto:jw@tks6.net Bern, Switzerland http://jw.tks6.net
participants (4)
-
Daniel Mueller -
Johannes Winkelmann -
Juergen.Daubert＠t-online.de -
Simone Rota