Robert Collins wrote:
>
> What I don't understand is the sudden rush. We are mere months away from
> full deb or rpm support - why try to shoehorn the existing tarball
> orientated tools into the same functionality these more mature tools have
> developed?
Good point. There is no need to "method 2-ize" mknetrel. I'm glad I
raised the issue -- but equally glad that it was shot down.
As far as "the sudden rush" -- it's just a function of new contributors.
Jan had his own home grown tool, which he'd been using for private
releases of guile and lilypond. When it came time to make guile an
official package, I pointed out that his home grown tool overlapped with
mknetrel. Jan has been attempted to get mknetrel into position to
(entirely) replace his homegrown tool.
However, that led to philosophical conflict: the homegrown tool did more
than is really needed for the short term 'mknetrel' solution. How much
of Jan's cross-tools' features get merged into mknetrel, and why?
That question brought the conflict and the "sudden rush". But it's
mostly settled now -- mknetrel will not support everything that
cross-tools did, because cross-tools did too much. :-)
--Chuck
