Guido Berhoerster wrote: > * Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-11-19 16:08]: >> Jyri Virkki wrote: >>> The correct way to do this is to have contributors check in and >>> maintain their source in a well known repository (the infrastructure >>> is already set up with mercurial repositories on hg.opensolaris.org) >>> and have an opensolaris.org release engineering build machine pull, >>> build and publish each package to the repository. As Guido says >>> above, "it's not a new idea, but standard procedure". >> ...and you're only repeating what everyone else has already agreed on >> and said. > > Well it would be really nice if that would be reflected in the > proposal, especially that the current procedure is temporary > until further infrastructure is in place. > > I just looked at my mail archives, we had the same discussion > already back in June, see > http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/pkg-discuss/2008-June/004026.html > For five months nothing happened, then somebody came up with a > new proposal starting all over like the first and we have the > same discussion all over again with the same arguments coming > once again to the same conclusion. It's really ridiculous.
As far as I'm concerned it is currently reflected in the proposal, just not in the words you used, but in it's meaning. >> Until an automated system is in place, having packages is better than >> not having anything at all. > > We could have had this five months ago if someone had set up the > technical infrastructure. That would have been even better. An automated system is more than just servers and so forth. -- Shawn Walker _______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
