Re: Subversion package maintainer
Dave Slusher wrote: > OK, I'm going to bundle all replies in one mail rather than several little > ones: > >>> This is a client only build." >> I haven't actually *tested* it, but svnserve seems to build fine. > > Well, that begs a question. My original intention was to tackle only the > client, and then later on if it seemed like a thing to do and was needed, add > the server. Does it make sense to have two seperate packages for client and > server, have only one package and roll support in for the server whenever, or > bite the bullet and wait to offer a package until I have both parts in it? Given that my svnserve.exe is 25kB, I think it makes sense to just have a single package. I've just done some test checkins and checkouts via the svnserve daemon, and everything seems to work fine. Re "waiting for both parts" - I didn't have to do anything complicated to build the server. It just built as part of the normal build process. >>> category: Devel >>> requires: cygwin apache expat >> Why the dependency on apache? >> What do you plan to do about neon, apr and apr-util ? > > I really don't know. I took a first stab at this from the subversion docs, but > I'm not 100% sure. I tried to follow the "how to become a package maintainer" > checklist as close to the letter as I could, which says ask if there is an > existing maintainer and propose a setup.hint in the initial message. I haven't > done a lot of the gut work on this yet, since I didn't want to put a lot of > resource in if someone was already doing it. I can send a revised one around > in a day or two, after I have actually tried to assemble a package and tested > for sure what dependencies exist. OK, well I can tell you for sure about the dependencies: expat, db4.1: Already have Cygwin packages. neon, apr, apr-util: No Cygwin packages. I was wondering how you intended to package neon, apr and apr-util. > The one thing that seems for certain is that y'all are right and I don't need > apache as a package dependency. I think it might be a build dependency, but is > not a runtime one. No, not even a build dependency. Max.
Re: Subversion package maintainer
OK, I'm going to bundle all replies in one mail rather than several little ones: >> This is a client only build." >I haven't actually *tested* it, but svnserve seems to build fine. Well, that begs a question. My original intention was to tackle only the client, and then later on if it seemed like a thing to do and was needed, add the server. Does it make sense to have two seperate packages for client and server, have only one package and roll support in for the server whenever, or bite the bullet and wait to offer a package until I have both parts in it? >> category: Devel >> requires: cygwin apache expat >Why the dependency on apache? >What do you plan to do about neon, apr and apr-util ? I really don't know. I took a first stab at this from the subversion docs, but I'm not 100% sure. I tried to follow the "how to become a package maintainer" checklist as close to the letter as I could, which says ask if there is an existing maintainer and propose a setup.hint in the initial message. I haven't done a lot of the gut work on this yet, since I didn't want to put a lot of resource in if someone was already doing it. I can send a revised one around in a day or two, after I have actually tried to assemble a package and tested for sure what dependencies exist. The one thing that seems for certain is that y'all are right and I don't need apache as a package dependency. I think it might be a build dependency, but is not a runtime one. Since there appears to be no one else doing this, I'll assume that I should go ahead full steam and have better answers in a few days. Thanks all, d - This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
Re: Subversion package maintainer
On Sat, 4 Oct 2003, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 12:53:35AM +0100, Max Bowsher wrote: > >>category: Devel > >>requires: cygwin apache expat > > > >Why the dependency on apache? > > subversions needs apache to run, doesn't it? http://subversion.tigris.org/project_faq.html#need-apache Then why install it if I only need the client or use their "standalone server process over ssh" (if it works) ? And do you need Apache 2.0 ? Cygwin only has 1.3, no ? http://subversion.tigris.org/project_faq.html#multiple-apachim -- How to contact me - http://www.pervalidus.net/contact.html
Re: Subversion package maintainer
On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 12:53:35AM +0100, Max Bowsher wrote: >>category: Devel >>requires: cygwin apache expat > >Why the dependency on apache? subversions needs apache to run, doesn't it? This gets my vote, btw. cgf
Re: Subversion package maintainer
Dave Slusher wrote: > # Setup.hint for Subversion > #@ subversion-client # do I need this line? See CGF's email. > sdesc: "Client for Subversion revision control system" > ldesc: "Subversion is a revision control system meant to improve upon CVS. It > has most CVS features, and adds the ability to version directories, renames > and file metadata. It has atomic commits - no part of a commit takes effect > until the entire commit has succeeded. Revision numbers are per-commit, not > per-file; log messages are attached to the revision, not stored redundantly > as in CVS. The commands have deliberately been kept as similar as possible to > CVS to facilitate ease-of-use of Subversion for those familiar with CVS. > > This is a client only build." I haven't actually *tested* it, but svnserve seems to build fine. > category: Devel > requires: cygwin apache expat Why the dependency on apache? What do you plan to do about neon, apr and apr-util ? Max.
RE: Subversion package maintainer
> From: Dave Slusher > > I have recently had to build a cygwin version of the Subversion > client for my > own uses. It was time consuming enough that it made me wonder > about the status > of rolling this project into a cygwin package. I would be willing > to serve as > package maintainer if there is not someone already planning to do this. I > inquired on the Subversion developer list, and thus far everyone that has > responded would like to see it happen. > > I ask here as a courtesy, is there already someone who has > volunteered for this? No-one has to my knowledge... > If not, I will. Yay! Go for it :) J.
Re: Subversion package maintainer
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 06:07:47PM -0500, Dave Slusher wrote: ># Setup.hint for Subversion >#@ subversion-client # do I need this line? From the "Cygwin Packages" link: "A line that begins with a "@" behaves similarly to the setup.ini field (see below). It overrides the package name for the enclosing directory. This is an optional entry. It is intended only for historical packages where the package name is different from the name of the directory in which the package resides. This should not be necessary for "modern" setup.hint files." cgf
