On 11/8/05, Brendan Cully [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday, 08 November 2005 at 18:21, Alexander K. Hansen wrote:
Speaking for myself, I can now try to expedite some packages out of
the tracker. Anybody reading this thread who's got a package sitting
around, please email me (better yet,
On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 08:53:49 +0100
Martin Costabel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
self-interest and fun, not importance or general usefulness.
of course that is important. If you look up the internet however you will find
that this is precisely why darwin ports is cited as a professional option
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rogue wrote:
| On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 08:53:49 +0100 Martin Costabel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| wrote:
|
| ... I don't and never have used binaries, nor the stable tree so the
| above is not a request but I'm having a hard time reconciliating the
| (perceived)
On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 22:01:43 +0900
Peter O'Gorman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you willing to code a system that will build packages as they are
sumbitted, and as they are committed to cvs?
I am not a coder. I barely get by maintaining a couple of packages. Having said
that I can certainly
On Monday, 07 November 2005 at 08:38, Alexander K. Hansen wrote:
On 11/7/05, Rogue [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On another subject it seems that a tracker week would be a good
idea... it seems weird to me that packages that will essentially
sit in the unstable tree would be held for that long
On Nov 8, 2005, at 9:59 AM, Brendan Cully wrote:
Let me be honest: I have an axe to grind, since I've got a number of
my own packages languishing in the submission queue for months. I'm
grateful for the feedback I've gotten, and eg dmacks has definitely
improved the quality of my packages. But
On 11/8/05, Trevor Harmon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 8, 2005, at 9:59 AM, Brendan Cully wrote:
Let me be honest: I have an axe to grind, since I've got a number of
my own packages languishing in the submission queue for months. I'm
grateful for the feedback I've gotten, and eg dmacks
On Tuesday, 08 November 2005 at 14:46, Alexander K. Hansen wrote:
On 11/8/05, Trevor Harmon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps we need to review the process of how people are granted
commit access. On the other hand, is there even a process? I'm not
sure what criteria a developer must meet
On Nov 8, 2005, at 11:53 AM, Brendan Cully wrote:
It's a nice idea, but maybe it just recapitulates the submission queue
problem in miniature? I signed up on that page two days after it was
posted. Apparently senior developers are a scarce resource...
I agree; a mentoring system seems much
On Tuesday, 08 November 2005 at 14:46, Alexander K. Hansen wrote:
On 11/8/05, Trevor Harmon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps we need to review the process of how people are granted
commit access. On the other hand, is there even a process? I'm not
sure what criteria a developer must meet
On 11/8/05, Neil Tiffin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 11:19 AM -0800 11/8/05, Trevor Harmon wrote:
On Nov 8, 2005, at 9:59 AM, Brendan Cully wrote:
Let me be honest: I have an axe to grind, since I've got a number of
my own packages languishing in the submission queue for months. I'm
grateful
On Tuesday, 08 November 2005 at 18:21, Alexander K. Hansen wrote:
Speaking for myself, I can now try to expedite some packages out of
the tracker. Anybody reading this thread who's got a package sitting
around, please email me (better yet, fink-devel) the tracker ID
number. If the package
On Nov 8, 2005, at 3:21 PM, Alexander K. Hansen wrote:
The primary question isn't Do you know how to commit to CVS? (though
that's definitely an asset!), but rather Do you know enough about
Fink and how it works so that the packages you commit will generally
be reliable?
Agreed. But how do I
At 6:21 PM -0500 11/8/05, Alexander K. Hansen wrote:
The primary question isn't Do you know how to commit to CVS? (though
that's definitely an asset!), but rather Do you know enough about
Fink and how it works so that the packages you commit will generally
be reliable?
--
Agreed, but as a
On Nov 8, 2005, at 3:21 PM, Alexander K. Hansen wrote:
Speaking for myself, I can now try to expedite some packages out of
the tracker. Anybody reading this thread who's got a package sitting
around, please email me (better yet, fink-devel) the tracker ID
number. If the package looks OK to me
At 6:21 PM -0500 11/8/05, Alexander K. Hansen wrote:
Speaking for myself, I can now try to expedite some packages out of
the tracker. Anybody reading this thread who's got a package sitting
around, please email me (better yet, fink-devel) the tracker ID
number. If the package looks OK to me
On Sun, 6 Nov 2005 23:30:23 -0500
Alexander K. Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is also the issue of lack of maintainership, which is harder to solve.
Looking closely some of the dependencies that the packages I endeavour to
maintain have no maintainer so I'll be gradually be working my
On 11/7/05, Rogue [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 6 Nov 2005 23:30:23 -0500
Alexander K. Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is also the issue of lack of maintainership, which is harder to solve.
Looking closely some of the dependencies that the packages I endeavour to
maintain have no
On Mon, 7 Nov 2005 08:38:18 -0500
Alexander K. Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
some of the packages that sit in the tracker do so because
they just flat don't work on anybody's system other than the
submitter's and are awaiting fixes, or otherwise do not comply with
Fink policies--and
Rogue wrote:
[]
I suppose what I'm trying to say, on a more sinister tone, is how do
you ensure the seriously packaged .info/.patches are not drown into the
mass of hobbyists contributions? how do you ensure that you don't kill
the motivation of the dedicated individuals?
My €0.02:
Finks main
Chris Dolan wrote:
On Nov 5, 2005, at 5:45 PM, Alexander K. Hansen wrote:
A problem opposite to the one that you mentioned also occurs:
building on different machines with different packages that solve the
same virtual dependency (e.g. Xorg vs. Apple's X11) will generally
result in more than
On Nov 5, 2005, at 11:28 PM, Chris Dolan wrote:
On Nov 5, 2005, at 5:45 PM, Alexander K. Hansen wrote:
A problem opposite to the one that you mentioned also occurs:
building on different machines with different packages that solve the
same virtual dependency (e.g. Xorg vs. Apple's X11) will
On 04/11/2005, at 8:04 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Packages become available for binaries when
1) They've been tested well enough that the maintainer feels that it
can be moved to the stable source tree (with the guidance of other
developers as required).
2) The package is not of a
On 11/5/05, Philip Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 04/11/2005, at 8:04 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Packages become available for binaries when
1) They've been tested well enough that the maintainer feels that it
can be moved to the stable source tree (with the guidance of other
On Nov 6, 2005, at 23:30, Alexander K. Hansen wrote:
Originally, I was under the impression that there was a machine
autobuilding packages and uploading the binaries. However this is
obviously untrue. Does the fink project have the resources to have
such an autobuild system established?
A
On Nov 5, 2005, at 1:01 AM, Philip Lamb wrote:
Originally, I was under the impression that there was a machine
autobuilding packages and uploading the binaries. However this is
obviously untrue. Does the fink project have the resources to have
such an autobuild system established? Ideally,
On 11/5/05, Dave Vasilevsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 5, 2005, at 1:01 AM, Philip Lamb wrote:
Originally, I was under the impression that there was a machine
autobuilding packages and uploading the binaries. However this is
obviously untrue. Does the fink project have the resources
On Nov 5, 2005, at 2:55 AM, Dave Vasilevsky wrote:
Aside from hacking on buildfink, the best way to help is testing
packages. Maybe we should have a 'Test Week', when we ask all
developers to NOT write new packages, and instead test various
packages out and move them into stable?
I vote
On Nov 5, 2005, at 4:55 AM, Dave Vasilevsky wrote:
When it comes to a system to perform the builds on, we don't really
have anything at this point. A build box should ideally be a very
clean system, since we don't want any .debs to be accidentally
polluted. Also, we'd have to be careful
To me the voting process seems unweildy. I propose a freeze the
third thursday of every month on .info files (i.e. any new ones are
ignored until next month). One person or team dishes out packages
to volunteers in their perceived order of value. Each package is
only tested by one volunteer that
On 11/5/05, Chris Dolan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 5, 2005, at 4:55 AM, Dave Vasilevsky wrote:
When it comes to a system to perform the builds on, we don't really
have anything at this point. A build box should ideally be a very
clean system, since we don't want any .debs to be
On Nov 5, 2005, at 5:45 PM, Alexander K. Hansen wrote:
A problem opposite to the one that you mentioned also occurs:
building on different machines with different packages that solve the
same virtual dependency (e.g. Xorg vs. Apple's X11) will generally
result in more than one MD5 for the same
32 matches
Mail list logo
