Thanks for the suggestion, Keno. I have a couple of follow-on questions: 1. How do I make the package manager attend to the local METADATA file rather than try to grab/update it from GitHub? Would I edit the definition of DEFAULT_META in pkg.jl? Does this require recompiling Julia? 2. Some the local Julia installations are on users' individual PC's (running Windows). Will this strategy work for them as well as the Linux users? For the latter, I am the Julia maintainer, so I could make the necessary changes, once I understand them.
Thanks --Peter > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:julia- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Keno Fischer > Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2014 1:36 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [julia-users] How to manage local, propretary packages > > The best thing I can think of is to have a company-local METADATA that you > periodically update withe METADATA from GitHub. > > On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Peter Simon <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I've introduced several packages at work for my coworkers' use. I > > expect more to be added in the future, both from myself and other Julia > users. > > These packages must be considered proprietary to our company, and so > > cannot be hosted on GitHub nor listed in the GitHub-hosted METADATA. > > Some of these local packages depend on standard, publicly available > > packages, which are listed in their REQUIRE files. I have been > > telling others to use `Pkg.clone(...)` for the local packages, which > > works well for ensuring that the users also obtain the dependent > > packages automatically (via the package manager), but there is a > > problem. The package manager does not seem to keep track of the > > version number of a cloned package. For example, if I tag a package > > as 0.0.2, clone it, then do a `Pkg.installed` , the package manager > > reports that the version is 0.0.0-. Nor does the package manager > automatically update the package when a new version is available and the > > user types `Pkg.upate()`. Is there a better way to manage the local > > packages? > > > > Thanks, > > --Peter
