Re: [Fink-devel] Move aggressive

[Jeremy Higgs]

On 22/4/02 8:00 PM, "Max Horn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I think we should start to much more aggressively move things to
> stable-cvs. Reason: many people use unstable only because stable is
> far to outdated for them. Thus we get a lot user complaints about
> breakake in unstable, even though this is normal to happen at times
> (it shouldn't but can happen). If OTOH the majority of users still
> uses stable and never gives feedback therefore.



I agree...

> I also would like to know if anybody here has built & run any of
> these so I can move:
> pan-0.11.3-1
> gaim-0.56-3
> sdl-1.2.4-1

I have used pan with no problems...


___
Fink-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel

Re: [Fink-devel] Move aggressive

[Alexander Strange]

On Monday, April 22, 2002, at 06:00 AM, Max Horn wrote:
> gaim-0.56-3

Works fine.

> sdl-1.2.4-1

Works great; I've been using it for SMPEG and Aleph One.

--
Alexander Strange | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This message is encoded using the Rot-26 encoding method.  Unauthorized 
decoding of this message may result in extreme penalties under the DMCA.


___
Fink-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel

Re: [Fink-devel] Move aggressive

[Justin Hallett]

once Max, uses the tree() that I co wrote in fink to add it's functionalty
to fink list and fink info it will help :P

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>> Also many others, is there a quick and easy way to get a list of 
>> packages installed and not yet in stable?
>
>Use FinkCommander :-)
>
>(The smiley does not mean this is a joke, BTW)


¸.·´^`·.,][JFH][`·.,¸¸.·´][JFH][¸.·´^`·.,
  Justin F. Hallett - Systems Analyst   
  Phone: (780)-408-3094
Fax: (780)-454-3200
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 .·´^`·.,][JFH][`·.,¸¸.·´][JFH][¸.·´^`·.,


___
Fink-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel

Re: [Fink-devel] Move aggressive

[Martin Costabel]

On lundi, avril 22, 2002, at 03:58 , Peter O'Gorman wrote:

> Also many others, is there a quick and easy way to get a list of 
> packages installed and not yet in stable?

Use FinkCommander :-)

(The smiley does not mean this is a joke, BTW)

--
Martin


___
Fink-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel

Re: [Fink-devel] Move aggressive

[Justin Hallett]

I've also been using both especially mozilla 0.9.9 and I give them the
thumbs up as well.

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>Also, my Galeon package has a few users (at least I've gotten feedback 
>from around 6 or 7), but it depends on gnome-vfs (>= 1.0.3-4) and 
>mozilla (>= 0.9.9). I've been using both successfully for a 
>while--anybody else?

¸.·´^`·.,][JFH][`·.,¸¸.·´][JFH][¸.·´^`·.,
  Justin F. Hallett - Systems Analyst   
  Phone: (780)-408-3094
Fax: (780)-454-3200
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 .·´^`·.,][JFH][`·.,¸¸.·´][JFH][¸.·´^`·.,


___
Fink-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel

Re: [Fink-devel] Move aggressive

[Dave Vasilevsky]

On Monday, April 22, 2002, at 09:59  AM, Max Horn wrote:

> pan-0.11.3-1

I've been using Pan without any problems so far.

Also, my Galeon package has a few users (at least I've gotten feedback 
from around 6 or 7), but it depends on gnome-vfs (>= 1.0.3-4) and 
mozilla (>= 0.9.9). I've been using both successfully for a 
while--anybody else?

Dave


___
Fink-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel

Re: [Fink-devel] Move aggressive

[Peter O'Gorman]

On Monday, April 22, 2002, at 07:00  PM, Max Horn wrote:
>
>
> I also would like to know if anybody here has built & run any 
> of these so I can move:
> pan-0.11.3-1
> gaim-0.56-3
> sdl-1.2.4-1
>

I have built, installed and minimally tested the latest gaim.

Also many others, is there a quick and easy way to get a list of 
packages installed and not yet in stable?

I agree with this decision by the way.

Peter




___
Fink-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel

[Fink-devel] Move aggressive

[Max Horn]

I think we should start to much more aggressively move things to 
stable-cvs. Reason: many people use unstable only because stable is 
far to outdated for them. Thus we get a lot user complaints about 
breakake in unstable, even though this is normal to happen at times 
(it shouldn't but can happen). If OTOH the majority of users still 
uses stable and never gives feedback therefore.

Hence, I believe we should be a bit more pro-active when it comes to 
moving packages to stable. This also means we may have more often to 
revoke packages, but if done carefully, this shouldn't happen.

So my guideline "when to move to stable", would be:

1) You yourself must have built & installed the package, and 
performed at least basic checks that it's operational (thus, please 
nobody in the future check in packages that were never tested except 
by eyeballing - this just almost never works out. I did this in the 
past myself, and several others here did, but we can learn from our 
mistakes, can't we? :-)

2) At least one other person must have succesfully built the package 
and installed it. Ideally they should also have performed a basic 
function test, if possible

3) You must check that *all* dependencies are verified in stable! 
This is of utmost importance. If there are dependencies missing, you 
can ask the maintainer of that package if he can move.

4) Again, *double check it*! Moving more aggressively does not mean: 
moving without thinking. Be careful, or you will make a lot of people 
unhappy.

5) As in the past, small bug fixes can under some conditions be put 
into stable directly. Like if you change descriptive fields 
(Maintainer, License, Description, etc).; if you fix a download URL; 
and also if you add a BuildDepends that is necessary because of a 
package that was just moved into stable and which not is splitoffized.


Maybe there's more. Anyway no need to wait months for 
complaints/positive feedback.

OK, so if we switch to this scheme, it's possible that it will turn 
out not to be a good idea at all, e.g. because we get tons more 
complaints. OTOH, only time can really tell how well this does, so I 
propose we just try it out for some time.

Some packages I have built, installed, and in some cases tested (note 
that I didn't check the dependencies, you still have to do that):
aalib-1.4rc4-5
libxslt-1.0.15-1
db3-3.3.11-6.info
db4-4.0.14-6
f2c-20020123-2
freetype2-2.0.8-4
imagemagick-5.4.4-1
imlib-1.9.10-4
jikes-1.15-1
libxml-1.8.17-1
gd2-2.0.1-3
nano-1.0.9-1.info
readline-4.2a-5.info
r-base-1.4.1-3 (the one in stable is broken, BTW)
r-recommended-1.4.0-2
xml-dom-pm-1.38-1.info
xml-parser-pm-2.30-2.info
xml-regexp-pm-0.03-2.info
xml-simple-pm-1.05-2.info
xml-writer-pm-0.4-2.info

There are many more I can "testify" about I guess but I am to lazy to 
pick them all out now.


I also would like to know if anybody here has built & run any of 
these so I can move:
pan-0.11.3-1
gaim-0.56-3
sdl-1.2.4-1




Cheers,

Max
-- 
---
Max Horn
Software Developer

email: 
phone: (+49) 6151-494890

___
Fink-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel