On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 10:05 AM, Jyri Virkki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Stephen Hahn wrote: >> >> >> So, to answer these questions, the model David and I have been toying >> with is a "contrib" repository, with the largest component being >> binary packages from the recipes in the spec-files-extra or the F/OSS >> package base projects > [...] > >> 3. Either send us the URL to your private depot (running in readonly >> mode if public!), or use pkgrecv and GNU tar to collect your >> package in transaction form--and send us a URL to that file. > > Having anyone and everyone contribute pre-built binary packages is a > bad idea. It's ok for testing/experimenting but not for formally > published packages. > > Published packages need to be built on a known-standardized (on the > lowest common denominator supported) Release Engineering machine for > them to reliably be useful for everyone else. > > Packages built locally by developers on assorted laptops/etc in > various state of install means some of them will run on baseline > 2008.05 and other won't. (And some will run nowhere except in the > submitters own machine - people do get creative installing things with > their main work desktops.) > > If the goal is to have lots of applications useful to everyone, as > opposed to just lots of packages, they should get built on baselined > RE machines. Certainly by an automated process, as I see discussed a > little later in the thread, since centralized manual interaction > doesn't scale.
+10 Very good arguments well articulated. Regards, Moinak. > > > -- > Jyri J. Virkki - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Sun Microsystems > _______________________________________________ > pkg-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss > _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
