On Wed, 2008-06-18 at 22:59 +1200, Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote: > On Tue, 2008-06-17 at 16:09 -0700, Stephen Hahn wrote: > > So, to answer these questions, the model David and I have been toying > > with is a "contrib" repository, with the largest component being > > binary packages from the recipes in the spec-files-extra or the F/OSS > > package base projects > > > > http://pkgbuild.sourceforge.net/ > > http://opensolaris.org/os/project/pkgbase/ > > > > (depending on what Laca and company say, of course). I would expect > > to take other contributions using a process like > > Awesome! > > > 4. The /contrib project members will vote on inclusion, based on > > following best practices on naming and metadata. If you like, the > > project can revise your metadata for completeness, or you can > > update your proposed package based on that review. > > Sounds good. We will come up with guidelines/processes to ensure > a level of quality. Hopefully Albert will take the lead with that.
Sweet. I'll try to draw up a set of initial contributor guidelines first, and work on developing the processes based on my previous proposal and the feedback so far. The tools should fall into place (hopefully) once we know exactly what the processes require. Once they are ready it might make sense to recommend that packagers use an SFE/pkgbase-mediated process including getting their package into SFE, instead of applying to /contrib themselves. That way it would be easier ensure packages are updated and consistent. Going directly to /contrib would still make sense for packagers that don't want to work with our tools, or software that would be problematic for inclusion in SFE. Is /contrib appropriate for ISVs with possibly non-free software as well? -Albert _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
