At 10:36 Uhr -0500 16.01.2003, David R. Morrison wrote:
Hm, why exactly should this be in the package? Why not in a seperate white list, as it is done currently?With an eye towards constructing an automated build system for the binary distribution one of these days, I'd like to propose a new field for fink .info files:BinaryDistribution: True/False or Yes/No This field would only be consulted if the package is labeled License: Restrictive and in that case, it would indicate whether or not the package should be part of the binary distribution. Right now, this has to be done by hand and it is one of the things obstructing automation. Comments?
I don't like the idea particular to have this in the .info file. It is only information that is needed by a selected few, and is not in general necessary to build the package. Furthermore, the person who decides the value of this field is usuall != the package maintainer. This (to me at least) strongly suggests it's not the right place to store this data.
Decisions whether a package should go into the bindist or not usually will *not* be made by the pkg maintainer. He will be consulted on this usually, but doesn't decide it. Hence putting this into the .info file seems wrong to me.
Max
--
-----------------------------------------------
Max Horn
Software Developer
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.NET email is sponsored by: Thawte.com
Understand how to protect your customers personal information by implementing
SSL on your Apache Web Server. Click here to get our FREE Thawte Apache Guide: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0029en
_______________________________________________
Fink-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
