On 1/29/2010 7:18 AM, David Boyes wrote: > On 1/29/10 6:31 AM, "Simon Wilkinson" <s...@inf.ed.ac.uk> wrote: > >> Ultimately this is the key issue. Until it becomes a high priority for >> someone, and that person publishes the necessary configuration, this isn't >> going to improve. Equally critically, we need people to take responsibility >> for maintaining the packaging as releases occur. >> >> Any volunteers? > > Got a few other things to do at the moment, but we should discuss this > off-list. There may be an opportunity to do something about this.
Derrick and Doug Engert have been the Binary Release builders for Solaris. (See the Port Masters / Binary Release Builders list at http://www.openafs.org/credits.html). I suspect that if OpenAFS were contributed scripts for constructing native installation packages that they would be willing to make use of them. If you would like to participate in release building, please add yourself to the release-team mailing list and participate in the release team Jabber meetings that occur prior to each release. https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team On 1/29/2010 7:12 AM, David Boyes wrote: > Meh. The Transarc paths are passably tolerable, no need to invent a wheel > for invention's sake. It'd be useful to see what others have done to see if > my assumptions are close to what others do. Anyone that would be willing to > let me look at what they've done would be appreciated -- no strings > attached. Transarc paths continue to be used in Solaris packaging for consistency with prior releases. We are conservative about changing the defaults in order to make upgrading for existing deployments easier. This is not to say that changes cannot be made but we would prefer that there be either significant reasons for doing so or strong support from the community for the change. Jeffrey Altman
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
