Hi Phil,
Am 24.09.2009 um 22:51 schrieb Philip Brown:
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Ben Walton <[email protected]>
wrote:
Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Thu Sep 24 16:36:20 -0400
2009:
Could you describe more precisely what you mean by "get up and
running" please?
Suck in all the packages required by GAR.
sorry for being dense.. but what definition of "by GAR" do you mean?
The base packages from CSW needed to build packages with GAR.
Easier to type and can be updated to reflect any future changes to
GAR
requirements. It doesn't bring a GAR package itself, but it makes
getting started easier. It's a 'lazy web' kind of thing.
Why not "make a gar package" straight up, instead of going halfway?
We badly need it. and Dago is too busy to do it :)
Partly, yes. But we already have it in mgar/pkg/gar. However, this would
only be useful if every commit to GAR would trigger a rebuild
(buildbot?)
And source packages.
A suggestion: I personally think a package layout that makes sense for
that would be:
1. CSWgar - a package of "the gar build system/utilities",
independant of anything else
2. CSWcswgar - a layer on top of CSWgar, that adds in all the OpenCSW
specific stuff, to generic GAR, plus adds in a subversion dependancy,
etc.
I disagree here. Either you choose source packages with a packaged
GAR or "developer mode" with Bens base and GAR and build descriptions
from the repository. Mixed mode calls for trouble.
Best regards
-- Dago
_______________________________________________
maintainers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
