From: Andrej N. G. <an...@re...> - 2012-06-04 10:28:39
|
Hello! Julien Lavergne has written on Monday, 4 June, at 10:05: >I updated the Debian directory on the git for 2 main reasons : >- easily add daily builds of packages from git (using by Ubuntu and Opensuse currently) >- add the ability for everyone to build packages locally from git. >Of course, the Debian directory is excluded of the source tarball, if it is generated with "make dist". >The directories was already there, before I started to use LXDE. IMO, it should not be a problem as long as it's not shipped in the source tarball, but I understand it could be a source of discussion. >Let's other people express their feelings about this. If the folders need to be removed, I just need to update my daily builds. You have my vote for it, that way anyone else with Git access could add fixes to packaging. At least there are two major packaging tools for Linux: dpkg and rpm. So why don't have building files for those in the Git repository as soon it doesn't go into source tarball anyway? With best wishes. Andriy. |
From: Andrej N. G. <an...@re...> - 2012-06-04 14:00:25
|
Hello! Stephan Sokolow has written on Monday, 4 June, at 8:34: >Sounds like my usual arguments for switching things TO GitHub. >Simple, integrated bug tracker that your average end user can easily use. I personally highly dislike GitHub - it's too overloaded with images and menus and lacks simplicity of gitweb interface (which SF git viewer resembles BTW). And their tracker also lacks any powerful search engine (which both SF tracker and Bugzilla have). So I'm against GitHub counting it less convenient than SF. Andriy. |
From: Stephan S. <gma...@sp...> - 2012-06-04 18:07:38
|
To each his own. I can understand wanting a more powerful search interface and I'm willing to put up with Bugzilla even though the UI has a bit of a learning curve at times but, for the record, I consider SourceForce a significant disincentive toward participation in a project. (The only thing that comes to mind which is worse is projects which rely on mailing lists they don't expose via GMane) On 12-06-04 10:00 AM, Andrej N. Gritsenko wrote: > Hello! > > Stephan Sokolow has written on Monday, 4 June, at 8:34: >> Sounds like my usual arguments for switching things TO GitHub. > >> Simple, integrated bug tracker that your average end user can easily use. > > I personally highly dislike GitHub - it's too overloaded with images > and menus and lacks simplicity of gitweb interface (which SF git viewer > resembles BTW). And their tracker also lacks any powerful search engine > (which both SF tracker and Bugzilla have). So I'm against GitHub counting > it less convenient than SF. > > Andriy. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions > will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware > threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ |
From: PCMan <pcm...@gm...> - 2012-06-04 14:54:38
|
It's nice to have rpm and debian files for everyone as these are the most frequently used package formats. However, there are too many differences among distros which use them. Fedora, Mandriva, and SuSE all use rpm, but the rpm definition files written for one do not work for others. The debian/control file written for debian does not work for ubuntu, either. So, my vote is for removal of them from git repo. These files exist in the repo because of some historical reasons. Now there is no need to put them in the repo so let's remove them. Cheers On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 6:28 PM, Andrej N. Gritsenko <an...@re...> wrote: > Hello! > > Julien Lavergne has written on Monday, 4 June, at 10:05: >>I updated the Debian directory on the git for 2 main reasons : >>- easily add daily builds of packages from git (using by Ubuntu and Opensuse currently) >>- add the ability for everyone to build packages locally from git. > >>Of course, the Debian directory is excluded of the source tarball, if it is generated with "make dist". > >>The directories was already there, before I started to use LXDE. IMO, it should not be a problem as long as it's not shipped in the source tarball, but I understand it could be a source of discussion. > >>Let's other people express their feelings about this. If the folders need to be removed, I just need to update my daily builds. > > You have my vote for it, that way anyone else with Git access could > add fixes to packaging. At least there are two major packaging tools for > Linux: dpkg and rpm. So why don't have building files for those in the > Git repository as soon it doesn't go into source tarball anyway? > > With best wishes. > Andriy. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions > will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware > threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > Pcmanfm-develop mailing list > Pcm...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pcmanfm-develop |
From: Julien L. <gi...@ub...> - 2012-06-04 19:53:24
|
Le 06/04/2012 04:54 PM, PCMan a écrit : > The debian/control file written for debian does not work for ubuntu, either. That's not true, current debian/control are all from Debian, and work perfectly on Ubuntu daily builds. And it should work on any Debian-based distribution, unless they do some crasy choices, or are not up-to-date enough. Regards, Julien Lavergne |
From: PCMan <pcm...@gm...> - 2012-06-05 11:53:13
|
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 3:53 AM, Julien Lavergne <gi...@ub...> wrote: > Le 06/04/2012 04:54 PM, PCMan a écrit : >> The debian/control file written for debian does not work for ubuntu, either. > That's not true, current debian/control are all from Debian, and work This is 99% true. IIRC, when package names and library version numbers are different, it's possible that the debian/control files cannot be used in derived distros. This is a rare case, though. > perfectly on Ubuntu daily builds. And it should work on any Debian-based > distribution, unless they do some crasy choices, or are not up-to-date > enough. > > Regards, > Julien Lavergne > |