Le mercredi 16 mai, William Stein a écrit: > I'm against shipping the exact upstream tarballs with Sage, as > explained above (e.g., what if they contain opaque Windows binaries?).
My impression is that the current situations occur (sorted in very fast decreasing frequency) : (1) upstream tarball is ready to ship (tarballs obtained from 'make dist' with autotools generally belong to that category) ; (2) upstream tarball is in fact obtained by taking a snapshot from a repository (there something more might be needed, like running some kind of autogen.sh, removing .hg/.svn/.git/.whatever) ; (3) upstream tarball is a mess for various reasons. So there is definitely a need for some script to prepare the shipped tarball. Let me call it spkg-get-upstream-tarball for the rest. For (1), that script could just be a one-liner wget (or is that a too big dependency?). For (2), that script would be a few lines to checkout and remove the cruft. Perhaps sage could even have a generic spkg-get-upstream-from-vs script which would be called something like : spkg-get-upstream-from-vs --git git://url/to/upstream/foo that would take care of doing the checkout and removing the obvious directories ; that way each spkg-get-upstream-tarball would just call that generic script, then do additional actions. For (3), that script would do everything by hand. How many (3) are there anyway? Snark on #sagemath -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
