On Feb 17, 2011, at 11:55 PM, Rainer Müller wrote:
>
> On 2011-02-16 18:39 , Daniel J. Luke wrote:
>> On Feb 16, 2011, at 12:38 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>> I would dislike removing vcs fetching because it is very convenient to use.
>>> It can be used correctly -- specifying a version to fetch -- maintainers
>>> just need to know that they need to do that. Yes, the downloads are not
>>> verified. I'm not terribly fussed about that. Maybe I should be. Maybe I
>>> just don't want the added inconvenience of having to create and upload
>>> tarballs every time I want to update a port that uses vcs fetching.
>>
>> sounds like something that could be automated so that it wouldn't be painful
>> for the port maintainer, but still gives the benefit of pulling a verified
>> tarball for end-users.
>
> It would be possible to download and create a tarball automatically, but
> the checksums also need to be stored somewhere. I would not trust an
> automated script to add or replace checksums in a Portfile. So this task
> still needs to be handled by the maintainer before committing or the
> generated checksums need to be outside the Portfile.
I was thinking of automation just to make the maintainer's life easier.
So, something that can generate a local tarball, output the checksums so the
maintainer can put it in the portfile and can also automatically upload it (to
a ticket or whatever) so that it can be hosted for MacPorts use.
--
Daniel J. Luke
+========================================================+
| *---------------- dl...@geeklair.net ----------------* |
| *-------------- http://www.geeklair.net -------------* |
+========================================================+
| Opinions expressed are mine and do not necessarily |
| reflect the opinions of my employer. |
+========================================================+
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
