Max et al: May I suggest that included in the plan is some sort of effort to establish a policy for other package systems to follow to avoid interference? Maybe this is more an issue for the other package systems out there, but some publicly-documented guidance wouldn't hurt, I think.
I wrote up a proposal for how PackageMaker pkg files and fink can get along, and I'm eager to get your feedback on it. I can't speak for Apple, but if they are bundling their system software in pax-based packages, then I doubt this issue will go away any time soon. So here are my suggestions on how to make things work together well: http://www.macgimp.org/fink Now that I've got an email server glitch sorted out, I look forward to working with you all directly on this list (and fink-user too.) Best, Mat Caughron MacGIMP.org admin > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 12:38:04 +0100 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > From: Max Horn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [Fink-devel] plan > > I want to start a PLAN file in CVS which contains the steps we plan > for the future, and for which release each is targeted. We should > also maybe fix what features we think are necessary for a 1.0 release. > > Pre 1.0: > > * shlibs support - I am going to work on this during weekend > > * two-level hierachy inside trees - the long ago discussed move from > a one level deep hierachy (gnome, games, editors, etc.) to a > two-level one. We need to agree on a set of directories for this, I > think, and some tools for the bin/srcdist will have to be adapted. > > * support for java packages > > * A way to sign .deb files (and maybe als .info files), and to > automatically verify these signatures. This might not seems that > important right now, but definitly will be in the future. I think we > should use gnupg for this. At least all of the fink core developers > will have to have a key, ideally all cross-signed with each other. > Whenever somebody makes a binary release available, he'll sign it > with his personal key. This is no easy thing, and probably will have > to be discuessed in a full thread of its own. > > * Move to a new package format - yes or no, and which. This has to be > carefully designed, I think. > > > Post 1.0 (this doesn't mean we can't do it before, but it's not > necessary for 1.0 either) > > * interactive mode > * GUI > > > Please mention things I forgot and which you think are important for > future fink versions. > > > Cheers, > > Max > -- > ----------------------------------------------- > Max Horn > Software Developer > > email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > phone: (+49) 6151-494890 > > _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel