On Fri, 2 Jul 2004, Benoit des Ligneris wrote:
Well, I don't "need" it but I agree with Jason. In order to modify the code/SPEC the SPEC should be in CVS as any other rpm package distributed with OSCAR.
No one else will be; I'm the developer and maintainer. I have a separate CVS for env-switcher's source code and whatnot (env-switcher.sf.net). I only put output RPMs in OSCAR's CVS.
My main goal here is to avoid this kind of confusion again -- I knew that all that Ben needed was at the CVS HEAD in the RPMS directory. But he was looking in the SRPMS directory at an outdated SRPM (admittedly because I had not updated it because I was thinking that an SRPM wasn't needed because it's a noarch).
All things being equal, I would prefer to keep development control of env-switcher for the moment, and keep its development elsewhere. The specfile and 1.0.13 tarball are available from the env-switcher SF project page if anyone needs them. And I'm always open for patches / fixes -- ask jenos (granted, while I was working on my dissertation this past spring, I was a bit slow for some of things that jenos asked for, but I did eventually get them in there ;-).
If someone feels strongly about this, I can put an SRPM in there. It's just my [marginal] preference that we don't. Whatever the group decides.
I just want the minimal image stuff in CVS so that we can move forward! ;-)
--
{+} Jeff Squyres
{+} [EMAIL PROTECTED]
{+} http://www.lam-mpi.org/-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training.
Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com
_______________________________________________
Oscar-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oscar-devel
