Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On 11/8/05, Brendan Cully <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tuesday, 08 November 2005 at 18:21, Alexander K. Hansen wrote: > > Speaking for myself, I can now try to expedite some packages out of > > the tracker. Anybody reading this thread who's got a package sitting > > around, please email me (bet

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

I've also a package sitting in the tracker for a long time: It is an update for the new upstream version of IPython (ipython.scipy.org/>) that has been in the Fink distribution for a long time. I've been u

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

At 6:21 PM -0500 11/8/05, Alexander K. Hansen wrote: Speaking for myself, I can now try to expedite some packages out of the tracker. Anybody reading this thread who's got a package sitting around, please email me (better yet, fink-devel) the tracker ID number. If the package looks OK to me I'l

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On 11/8/05, Trevor Harmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 8, 2005, at 3:21 PM, Alexander K. Hansen wrote: > > > The primary question isn't "Do you know how to commit to CVS?" (though > > that's definitely an asset!), but rather "Do you know enough about > > Fink and how it works so that the pac

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

At 6:21 PM -0500 11/8/05, Alexander K. Hansen wrote: Speaking for myself, I can now try to expedite some packages out of the tracker. Anybody reading this thread who's got a package sitting around, please email me (better yet, fink-devel) the tracker ID number. If the package looks OK to me I'l

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On Nov 8, 2005, at 3:21 PM, Alexander K. Hansen wrote: Speaking for myself, I can now try to expedite some packages out of the tracker. Anybody reading this thread who's got a package sitting around, please email me (better yet, fink-devel) the tracker ID number. If the package looks OK to me

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

At 6:21 PM -0500 11/8/05, Alexander K. Hansen wrote: The primary question isn't "Do you know how to commit to CVS?" (though that's definitely an asset!), but rather "Do you know enough about Fink and how it works so that the packages you commit will generally be reliable?" -- Agreed, but as a

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On Nov 8, 2005, at 3:21 PM, Alexander K. Hansen wrote: The primary question isn't "Do you know how to commit to CVS?" (though that's definitely an asset!), but rather "Do you know enough about Fink and how it works so that the packages you commit will generally be reliable?" Agreed. But how do

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On Tuesday, 08 November 2005 at 18:21, Alexander K. Hansen wrote: > Speaking for myself, I can now try to expedite some packages out of > the tracker. Anybody reading this thread who's got a package sitting > around, please email me (better yet, fink-devel) the tracker ID > number. If the package

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On 11/8/05, Neil Tiffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 11:19 AM -0800 11/8/05, Trevor Harmon wrote: > >On Nov 8, 2005, at 9:59 AM, Brendan Cully wrote: > > > >>Let me be honest: I have an axe to grind, since I've got a number of > >>my own packages languishing in the submission queue for months. I

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

At 11:19 AM -0800 11/8/05, Trevor Harmon wrote: On Nov 8, 2005, at 9:59 AM, Brendan Cully wrote: Let me be honest: I have an axe to grind, since I've got a number of my own packages languishing in the submission queue for months. I'm grateful for the feedback I've gotten, and eg dmacks has defi

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On Tuesday, 08 November 2005 at 14:46, Alexander K. Hansen wrote: On 11/8/05, Trevor Harmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Perhaps we need to review the process of how people are granted > commit access. On the other hand, is there even a process? I'm not > sure what criteria a developer must m

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On Nov 8, 2005, at 11:53 AM, Brendan Cully wrote: It's a nice idea, but maybe it just recapitulates the submission queue problem in miniature? I signed up on that page two days after it was posted. Apparently senior developers are a scarce resource... I agree; a mentoring system seems much too

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On Tuesday, 08 November 2005 at 14:46, Alexander K. Hansen wrote: > On 11/8/05, Trevor Harmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Perhaps we need to review the process of how people are granted > > commit access. On the other hand, is there even a process? I'm not > > sure what criteria a developer must

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On 11/8/05, Trevor Harmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 8, 2005, at 9:59 AM, Brendan Cully wrote: > > > Let me be honest: I have an axe to grind, since I've got a number of > > my own packages languishing in the submission queue for months. I'm > > grateful for the feedback I've gotten, and e

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On Nov 8, 2005, at 9:59 AM, Brendan Cully wrote: Let me be honest: I have an axe to grind, since I've got a number of my own packages languishing in the submission queue for months. I'm grateful for the feedback I've gotten, and eg dmacks has definitely improved the quality of my packages. But l

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On Monday, 07 November 2005 at 08:38, Alexander K. Hansen wrote: > On 11/7/05, Rogue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On another subject it seems that a tracker week would be a good > > idea... it seems weird to me that packages that will essentially > > sit in the unstable tree would be held for tha

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 22:01:43 +0900 Peter O'Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Are you willing to code a system that will build packages as they are > sumbitted, and as they are committed to cvs? I am not a coder. I barely get by maintaining a couple of packages. Having said that I can certainly

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Rogue wrote: | On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 08:53:49 +0100 Martin Costabel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | wrote: | | ... I don't and never have used binaries, nor the stable tree so the | above is not a request but I'm having a hard time reconciliating the | (perceived

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 08:53:49 +0100 Martin Costabel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "self-interest" and "fun", not "importance" or "general usefulness". of course that is important. If you look up the internet however you will find that this is precisely why darwin ports is cited as a professional o

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

Rogue wrote: [] I suppose what I'm trying to say, on a more sinister tone, is how do you ensure the seriously packaged .info/.patches are not drown into the mass of hobbyists contributions? how do you ensure that you don't kill the motivation of the dedicated individuals? My €0.02: Finks main

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On Mon, 7 Nov 2005 08:38:18 -0500 "Alexander K. Hansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > some of the packages that sit in the tracker do so because > they just flat don't work on anybody's system other than the > submitter's and are awaiting fixes, or otherwise do not comply with > Fink policies--and

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On 11/7/05, Rogue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 6 Nov 2005 23:30:23 -0500 > "Alexander K. Hansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > There is also the issue of lack of maintainership, which is harder to solve. > > Looking closely some of the dependencies that the packages I endeavour to > mai

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On Sun, 6 Nov 2005 23:30:23 -0500 "Alexander K. Hansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There is also the issue of lack of maintainership, which is harder to solve. Looking closely some of the dependencies that the packages I endeavour to maintain have no maintainer so I'll be gradually be working

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On Nov 6, 2005, at 23:30, Alexander K. Hansen wrote: Originally, I was under the impression that there was a machine autobuilding packages and uploading the binaries. However this is obviously untrue. Does the fink project have the resources to have such an autobuild system established? A mini

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On 11/5/05, Philip Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 04/11/2005, at 8:04 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > Packages become available for binaries when > > > > 1) They've been tested well enough that the maintainer feels that it > > can be moved to the stable source tree (with the guidance

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On Nov 5, 2005, at 11:28 PM, Chris Dolan wrote: On Nov 5, 2005, at 5:45 PM, Alexander K. Hansen wrote: A problem opposite to the one that you mentioned also occurs: building on different machines with different packages that solve the same virtual dependency (e.g. Xorg vs. Apple's X11) will gen

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

Chris Dolan wrote: On Nov 5, 2005, at 5:45 PM, Alexander K. Hansen wrote: A problem opposite to the one that you mentioned also occurs: building on different machines with different packages that solve the same virtual dependency (e.g. Xorg vs. Apple's X11) will generally result in more than on

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On Nov 5, 2005, at 5:45 PM, Alexander K. Hansen wrote: A problem opposite to the one that you mentioned also occurs: building on different machines with different packages that solve the same virtual dependency (e.g. Xorg vs. Apple's X11) will generally result in more than one MD5 for the same p

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On 11/5/05, Chris Dolan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 5, 2005, at 4:55 AM, Dave Vasilevsky wrote: > > > When it comes to a system to perform the builds on, we don't really > > have anything at this point. A build box should ideally be a very > > clean system, since we don't want any .debs to

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

To me the voting process seems unweildy.  I propose a freeze the third thursday of every month on .info files (i.e. any new ones are ignored until next month).  One person or team dishes out packages to volunteers in their perceived order of value.  Each package is only tested by one volunteer that

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On Nov 5, 2005, at 4:55 AM, Dave Vasilevsky wrote: When it comes to a system to perform the builds on, we don't really have anything at this point. A build box should ideally be a very clean system, since we don't want any .debs to be accidentally polluted. Also, we'd have to be careful it'

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On Nov 5, 2005, at 2:55 AM, Dave Vasilevsky wrote: Aside from hacking on buildfink, the best way to help is testing packages. Maybe we should have a 'Test Week', when we ask all developers to NOT write new packages, and instead test various packages out and move them into stable? I vote f

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On 11/5/05, Dave Vasilevsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Nov 5, 2005, at 1:01 AM, Philip Lamb wrote: > > Originally, I was under the impression that there was a machine > > autobuilding packages and uploading the binaries. However this is > > obviously untrue. Does the fink project have the re

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

On Nov 5, 2005, at 1:01 AM, Philip Lamb wrote: Originally, I was under the impression that there was a machine autobuilding packages and uploading the binaries. However this is obviously untrue. Does the fink project have the resources to have such an autobuild system established? Ideally,