On Jun 6, 2009, at 1:01 PM, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
There have been a few attempts at this in the past - what was wrong with them again? (I can remember at least three - your chroot build scripts, wbb4's builds that auto generated a website that listed failures and successes, and blb's mpab http://trac.macports.org/wiki/MPAB )
They all "kinda worked" but not well enough that nobody wanted to actually host them anywhere since they were more clearly science experiments, abandoned in early childhood, rather than any serious attempt at regression testing.
Perhaps there's just a little more work that needs to happen to get things into a state where we can work out the 'homing' situation?
Sure. Any of the above (I think mpab might be the best starting point) could be carried forward to the point where the output they produced was actually useful to some percentage of Portfile maintainers, which I think is the reasonable litmus test for "enough success to host".
I actually had a hacked up version of your scripts running with disk images (with the ports getting installed onto shadow files - I was thinking it might be possible to build packages from that output too ...) but got distracted by something shiny ;-)
That seems to happen to everyone in this space. I think it's because testing is so exciting and capable of holding one's interest for extended periods. :)
... but packaging will all be fixed once we get apkg, right? ;-)
Absolutely! :) However, I'd be happy if we merely threw the output away completely right now and did it only for the testing value.
- Jordan _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
