On Mon, 22 Oct 2007, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote: > On 2007-10-18T13:07:45, Andrew Beekhof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Quick question, does anyone know if the pkg and port directories need > > to live in their current location? > > > > If not, I'm considering moving them to contrib/build/(pkg|port) where > > they'd also be joined by the openBSD port-build-file-thingies. > > I think that ought to be fine; we might want to create a packaging/ > top-directory though, and move the debian, rpm stuff there as well. > > > Also can someone refresh my memory as to which system each targets? > > pkg ::= solaris > > port ::= freebsd > > Yeah, that's what I recall too.
Yes, "pkg" is used by Solaris (and anything else that might want to jump on that bandwagon). I can't see any objection to migrating the "pkg" directory down into a subdirectory related to OS-related building. Indeed, such a tidy-up of the top-level, by migrating all such OS/building items (such as "port", "pkg", "debian", rpm="heartbeat.spec"), seems good. So "+1" for a migration of these things into a subdirectory. Are we voting between potential names "packaging/" and "contrib/build/"? I would vote for "packaging/". This is stuff that we (to a first approximation: developers with Hg commit access) try to support, as distinct from "contrib/", which would be stuff (which might include a packaging mechanism) provided by others for which we ourselves would not offer support. So a gentle "+1" in favour of "packaging/" rather than "contrib/.../" for the existing cases. -- : David Lee I.T. Service : : Senior Systems Programmer Computer Centre : : UNIX Team Leader Durham University : : South Road : : http://www.dur.ac.uk/t.d.lee/ Durham DH1 3LE : : Phone: +44 191 334 2752 U.K. : _______________________________________________________ Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
