Re: update - ccdoc 08.41 is ready for experimentation
On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 02:40:32PM -0700, Joe Linoff wrote: ccdoc 08.41 is ready for experimentation The distribution can be uploaded from: http://ccdoc.sourceforge.net/cygwin/ccdoc-08.41-1-src.tar.bz2 http://ccdoc.sourceforge.net/cygwin/ccdoc-08.41-1.tar.bz2 http://ccdoc.sourceforge.net/cygwin/setup.hint This isn't a beta testing list. Are you saying that this is ready for upload to the main cygwin site?
Re: update - ccdoc 08.41 is ready for experimentation
I am afraid that I am not sure what you mean by beta-test but I don't think that the program needs to be tested at all. This version of ccdoc has been released to sourceforge and is already in the public domain. The reason I submitted it to this group for approval was because I was bit confused by the cygwin submission documentation and wasn't sure whether I got the directory structures right in the tar files. Here is the directory structure for the binary release (ccdoc-08.41-1.tar.bz2): usr/ usr/bin/ usr/bin/ccdoc.exe usr/share/ usr/share/doc/ usr/share/doc/ccdoc-08.41-1/ usr/share/doc/ccdoc-08.41-1/LICENSE usr/share/doc/ccdoc-08.41-1/README usr/share/doc/ccdoc-08.41-1/RELEASE_NOTES usr/share/doc/Cygwin/ usr/share/doc/Cygwin/ccdoc-08.41-1.README usr/share/man/ usr/share/man/man1/ usr/share/man/man1/ccdoc.1 I apologize in advance if this was not the correct forum for this type of verification. If that is the case, can you point me in the right direction? Christopher Faylor wrote: On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 02:40:32PM -0700, Joe Linoff wrote: ccdoc 08.41 is ready for experimentation The distribution can be uploaded from: http://ccdoc.sourceforge.net/cygwin/ccdoc-08.41-1-src.tar.bz2 http://ccdoc.sourceforge.net/cygwin/ccdoc-08.41-1.tar.bz2 http://ccdoc.sourceforge.net/cygwin/setup.hint This isn't a beta testing list. Are you saying that this is ready for upload to the main cygwin site? -- This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.
Re: update - ccdoc 08.41 is ready for experimentation
I am afraid that I am not sure what you mean by beta-test but I don't think that the program needs to be tested at all. This version of ccdoc has been released to sourceforge and is already in the public domain. The reason I submitted it to this group for approval was because I was bit confused by the cygwin submission documentation and wasn't sure whether I got the directory structures right in the tar files. Here is the directory structure for the binary release (ccdoc-08.41-1.tar.bz2): usr/ usr/bin/ usr/bin/ccdoc.exe usr/share/ usr/share/doc/ usr/share/doc/ccdoc-08.41-1/ usr/share/doc/ccdoc-08.41-1/LICENSE usr/share/doc/ccdoc-08.41-1/README usr/share/doc/ccdoc-08.41-1/RELEASE_NOTES usr/share/doc/Cygwin/ usr/share/doc/Cygwin/ccdoc-08.41-1.README usr/share/man/ usr/share/man/man1/ usr/share/man/man1/ccdoc.1 I apologize in advance if this was not the correct forum for this type of verification. If that is the case, can you point me in the right direction? Christopher Faylor wrote: On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 02:40:32PM -0700, Joe Linoff wrote: ccdoc 08.41 is ready for experimentation The distribution can be uploaded from: http://ccdoc.sourceforge.net/cygwin/ccdoc-08.41-1-src.tar.bz2 http://ccdoc.sourceforge.net/cygwin/ccdoc-08.41-1.tar.bz2 http://ccdoc.sourceforge.net/cygwin/setup.hint This isn't a beta testing list. Are you saying that this is ready for upload to the main cygwin site? -- This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.
Re: update - ccdoc 08.41 is ready for experimentation
Joe Linoff wrote: I am afraid that I am not sure what you mean by beta-test but I don't think that the program needs to be tested at all. This version of ccdoc has been released to sourceforge and is already in the public domain. The reason I submitted it to this group for approval was because I was bit confused by the cygwin submission documentation and wasn't sure whether I got the directory structures right in the tar files. Here is the directory structure for the binary release (ccdoc-08.41-1.tar.bz2): Usually we make it clear in the message subject that we want to prpose a package for inclusion, this is called 'ITP'. 'Update is used if an already included package is updated and is ready for upload. I think from your subject it wasn't clear what you want, update an existing package as test release, offer to maintain a new package, or s.th. complete different at all. If this was an ITP, the package gets +1 vote from me. Someone needs to do the review, please! I'm busy right now, sorry. Gerrit -- =^..^=
Re: update - ccdoc 08.41 is ready for experimentation
Should I re-submit this with the ITP designation? Reini Urban wrote: Joe Linoff schrieb: I am afraid that I am not sure what you mean by beta-test but I don't think that the program needs to be tested at all. This version of ccdoc has been released to sourceforge and is already in the public domain. The reason I submitted it to this group for approval was because I was bit confused by the cygwin submission documentation and wasn't sure whether I got the directory structures right in the tar files. Here is the directory structure for the binary release (ccdoc-08.41-1.tar.bz2): usr/ usr/bin/ usr/bin/ccdoc.exe usr/share/ usr/share/doc/ usr/share/doc/ccdoc-08.41-1/ usr/share/doc/ccdoc-08.41-1/LICENSE usr/share/doc/ccdoc-08.41-1/README usr/share/doc/ccdoc-08.41-1/RELEASE_NOTES usr/share/doc/Cygwin/ usr/share/doc/Cygwin/ccdoc-08.41-1.README usr/share/man/ usr/share/man/man1/ usr/share/man/man1/ccdoc.1 I apologize in advance if this was not the correct forum for this type of verification. If that is the case, can you point me in the right direction? packaging looks perfect to me, just your wording was irritating. You need a subject like: [ITP] ccdoc 08.41 And then a sentence in which you state that you want to maintain this cygwin package. The reviewers will point to problems in your packaging or licensing. upload is reserved for packages which already got their 3 positive reviews and one GTG (good to go). Christopher Faylor wrote: On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 02:40:32PM -0700, Joe Linoff wrote: ccdoc 08.41 is ready for experimentation The distribution can be uploaded from: http://ccdoc.sourceforge.net/cygwin/ccdoc-08.41-1-src.tar.bz2 http://ccdoc.sourceforge.net/cygwin/ccdoc-08.41-1.tar.bz2 http://ccdoc.sourceforge.net/cygwin/setup.hint This isn't a beta testing list. Are you saying that this is ready for upload to the main cygwin site? -- This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.
Re: update - ccdoc 08.41 is ready for experimentation
Joe Linoff schrieb: Should I re-submit this with the ITP designation? If you get 3 positive reviews IMHO not.
Re: update - ccdoc 08.41 is ready for experimentation
Reini Urban wrote: Reini Urban schrieb: You need a subject like: [ITP] ccdoc 08.41 Why this funny version number? It should be called ccdoc-0.8.41 imho. Or if MAJOR is 8 leave the 0 away = ccdoc-8.41 This is irritating. Thanks for the insight. I would strongly prefer ccdoc-0.8.41 but the cygwin documentation seemed to state that it required two numbers. Since it sounds like it is allowed, I will change it to 0.8.41 and re-submit it tomorrow. BTW: This is the longest -h message I've ever seen. Was the intent to make ccdoc -h be longer then man ccdoc :) Just joking. I just love typing... And then a sentence in which you state that you want to maintain this cygwin package. The reviewers will point to problems in your packaging or licensing. upload is reserved for packages which already got their 3 positive reviews and one GTG (good to go). err, update, you know what I mean. ok, to the review: binary package looks fine. src package has /usr/src/ccdoc-08.41-1.patch hardcoded, which may not be! even if it's empty. The rest is simple, but okay. I like this much better and will do it tomorrow. I don't like hardcoded paths in tarfiles. It might be helpful to update the http://cygwin.com/setup.html because it seemed to indicate that the preferred method is to hard code the patch to /usr/src/foo-vendor-release.patch. See paragraph 4 (or so) in the Method One subsection under the Package Source section. Please just remove the patch file from this path. You might want to add this empty ccdoc-08.41-1.patch to topdir. but then you have to call tar cfj differently. Okay. I will add the patch to ccdoc-0.8.41-#/CYGWIN-PATCHES/ccdoc-0.8.41-#.patch where # is either 1 or 2 depending on whether the name change from ccdoc-08.41 to ccdoc-0.8.41 affects things. With these fixes +1 and GTG. It sounds like the new release should be ccdoc-0.8.42-2 even though the name changed. Thanks for taking the time to review this. I will make the changes and re-submit it tomorrow with the ITP designation. At least I have now a full cygwin class documentation: $ cd /usr/src $ ccdoc -db /tmp/ccdoc.db -pkg Cygwin src/winsup/cygwin/*.h $ ccdoc -db /tmp/ccdoc.db -index $ mkdir -p cygwin-ccdocs/images # required $ ccdoc -db /tmp/ccdoc.db -html cygwin-ccdocs/ -imgurl images/ -root winsup -rooturl winsup.html Wow, you are a quick study...
Re: update - ccdoc 08.41 is ready for experimentation
On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 04:06:21PM -0700, Joe Linoff wrote: I am afraid that I am not sure what you mean by beta-test but I don't think that the program needs to be tested at all. Any reason for sending this multiple times? What everyone seems to be missing is this: http://cygwin.com/cgi-bin2/package-cat.cgi?file=ccdoc%2Fccdoc-0.8.39-1grep=ccdoc ccdoc is already part of the distribution. That's what I mean by beta test. I don't understand why you'd send a ready for experimentation message here. Do you see any other messages like that in this mailing list? This version of ccdoc has been released to sourceforge and is already in the public domain. The reason I submitted it to this group for approval was because I was bit confused by the cygwin submission documentation and wasn't sure whether I got the directory structures right in the tar files. Here is the directory structure for the binary release (ccdoc-08.41-1.tar.bz2): Why are you having problems figuring out how to package this after having already provided it once before: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2003-02/msg00270.html I'm thoroughly confused. You are the package maintainer but you, and everyone else are treating this like a new experience. cgf
Re: update - ccdoc 08.41 is ready for experimentation
Christopher Faylor schrieb: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2003-02/msg00270.html I'm thoroughly confused. You are the package maintainer but you, and everyone else are treating this like a new experience. Just me. Sorry, my fault. I thought I know all the packages by hard. -- Reini Urban
Re: update - ccdoc 08.41 is ready for experimentation
Christopher Faylor wrote: On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 04:06:21PM -0700, Joe Linoff wrote: I am afraid that I am not sure what you mean by beta-test but I don't think that the program needs to be tested at all. Any reason for sending this multiple times? What everyone seems to be missing is this: http://cygwin.com/cgi-bin2/package-cat.cgi?file=ccdoc%2Fccdoc-0.8.39-1grep=ccdoc ccdoc is already part of the distribution. That's what I mean by beta test. I don't understand why you'd send a ready for experimentation message here. Do you see any other messages like that in this mailing list? No, but the setup.html specifically refers to experimentation in step 9 of the submitting a package guidelines. This version of ccdoc has been released to sourceforge and is already in the public domain. The reason I submitted it to this group for approval was because I was bit confused by the cygwin submission documentation and wasn't sure whether I got the directory structures right in the tar files. Here is the directory structure for the binary release (ccdoc-08.41-1.tar.bz2): Why are you having problems figuring out how to package this after having already provided it once before: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2003-02/msg00270.html I'm thoroughly confused. You are the package maintainer but you, and everyone else are treating this like a new experience. It is a new experience, sort of. This time I tried to the follow the http:://cygwin.com/setup.html instructions as closely as possible. In doing so, I ran across a number of things that appeared different than last time: 1. Version number appeared to be major.minor. 2. The patch file was supposed to be hard coded to /usr/src/foo-vendor-release.patch. 3. Binary release files went to /usr/share/man and /usr/share/doc. I think that is where I got into trouble. Cheers, Joe cgf -- This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.
Re: update - ccdoc 08.41 is ready for experimentation
On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 07:33:50PM -0700, Joe Linoff wrote: Christopher Faylor wrote: On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 04:06:21PM -0700, Joe Linoff wrote: I am afraid that I am not sure what you mean by beta-test but I don't think that the program needs to be tested at all. Any reason for sending this multiple times? What everyone seems to be missing is this: http://cygwin.com/cgi-bin2/package-cat.cgi?file=ccdoc%2Fccdoc-0.8.39-1grep=ccdoc ccdoc is already part of the distribution. That's what I mean by beta test. I don't understand why you'd send a ready for experimentation message here. Do you see any other messages like that in this mailing list? No, but the setup.html specifically refers to experimentation in step 9 of the submitting a package guidelines. That was a poor choice of words (it was probably mine) but it wasn't referring to cygwin-apps, anyway. I'm thoroughly confused. You are the package maintainer but you, and everyone else are treating this like a new experience. It is a new experience, sort of. This time I tried to the follow the http:://cygwin.com/setup.html instructions as closely as possible. In doing so, I ran across a number of things that appeared different than last time: 1. Version number appeared to be major.minor. The page says: Package naming scheme: use the vendor's version plus a release suffix for ports of existing packages... No one is forcing you to do make it major.minor. There are a number of examples of packages which are more than just major.minor but a really obvious one is the cygwin DLL itself. 2. The patch file was supposed to be hard coded to /usr/src/foo-vendor-release.patch. There are two patch methods and I don't believe that they have changed substantially in years. 3. Binary release files went to /usr/share/man and /usr/share/doc. I think that is where I got into trouble. It sounds like where you really got into trouble was not following the discussion about packages that has gone on since you last submitted ccdoc. As a package maintainer, you should be subscribed to cygwin-apps and you should be at least monitoring discussions about changes to package conventions (like moving from /usr/man to /usr/share/man). None of this should be a surprise. cgf
Re: update - ccdoc 08.41 is ready for experimentation
Christopher Faylor wrote: On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 07:33:50PM -0700, Joe Linoff wrote: Christopher Faylor wrote: On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 04:06:21PM -0700, Joe Linoff wrote: I am afraid that I am not sure what you mean by beta-test but I don't think that the program needs to be tested at all. Any reason for sending this multiple times? What everyone seems to be missing is this: http://cygwin.com/cgi-bin2/package-cat.cgi?file=ccdoc%2Fccdoc-0.8.39-1grep=ccdoc ccdoc is already part of the distribution. That's what I mean by beta test. I don't understand why you'd send a ready for experimentation message here. Do you see any other messages like that in this mailing list? No, but the setup.html specifically refers to experimentation in step 9 of the submitting a package guidelines. That was a poor choice of words (it was probably mine) but it wasn't referring to cygwin-apps, anyway. I'm thoroughly confused. You are the package maintainer but you, and everyone else are treating this like a new experience. It is a new experience, sort of. This time I tried to the follow the http:://cygwin.com/setup.html instructions as closely as possible. In doing so, I ran across a number of things that appeared different than last time: 1. Version number appeared to be major.minor. The page says: Package naming scheme: use the vendor's version plus a release suffix for ports of existing packages... No one is forcing you to do make it major.minor. There are a number of examples of packages which are more than just major.minor but a really obvious one is the cygwin DLL itself. I can see that now. 2. The patch file was supposed to be hard coded to /usr/src/foo-vendor-release.patch. There are two patch methods and I don't believe that they have changed substantially in years. I am sure that you are right. I saw the two different patch methods but I thought that the documentation said that the preferred method was to that this file should extract as: /usr/src/ I interpreted that to mean a hard-coded reference in the tarfile. When I re-submitted this request as an update, I changed the patch so that it used the old method. 3. Binary release files went to /usr/share/man and /usr/share/doc. I think that is where I got into trouble. It sounds like where you really got into trouble was not following the discussion about packages that has gone on since you last submitted ccdoc. As a package maintainer, you should be subscribed to cygwin-apps and you should be at least monitoring discussions about changes to package conventions (like moving from /usr/man to /usr/share/man). None of this should be a surprise. You are correct. I will be more vigilant in the future. Thanks for pointing this out. cgf -- This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.
Re: update - ccdoc 08.41 is ready for experimentation
On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 07:51:33PM -0700, Joe Linoff wrote: You are correct. I will be more vigilant in the future. Thanks for pointing this out. NP. Thanks for volunteering to maintain a package and put up with this grief. cgf
