From: Keith M. <kei...@us...> - 2013-10-06 21:00:58
|
On 26/09/13 23:32, Earnie Boyd wrote: > Now that I've started working with the mingw-dist catalogue system and > understanding some nuances and such I'm going to suggest something > that will help with affiliate package naming for the GUI. How exactly? The affiliation mechanism is rather more static than you seem to assume; furthermore, while I've already extended it to support affiliation at the component package level, extending it to the release level is not something I wish to contemplate. > What I'm thinking is a categorical package naming system. Using > package foo as an example I'm thinking that we could have a > mingw32-current-foo package a mingw32-previous-foo package and a > mingw32-history-foo package. The history package would contain all > the packages older than previous. Too abstract. Too arbitrary. To awkward to maintain. Too ephemeral. > I am also thinking that we have package names of > mingw32-current-ancillary-foo, etc where the mingw-current-foo would > contain the primary binary files and the ancillary package would > contain the documentation and other non-required files for the binary > package. By doing this we can present the user with a better GUI > presentation based on the affiliate grouping. > > Thoughts? I'm in favour of segregating core and ancilliary components into separate logical package containers, within common package-collections; (I advocated as much on https://sourceforge.net/p/mingw/bugs/2028/). I'm not in favour of the current --> previous --> historical notion. Most, if not all, of our users should be sufficiently numerate to interpret a progression of version numbers. mingw-get already shows "current" version of each package, (as "Repository Version"). I plan to enumerate all other mingw-get installable versions, on the GUI's "Versions" information tab; surely that will suffice? -- Regards, Keith. |