automake-ng
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Automake-NG] [PATCH 6/7] [ng] dist: new API to specify formats of d


From: Stefano Lattarini
Subject: Re: [Automake-NG] [PATCH 6/7] [ng] dist: new API to specify formats of distribution tarballs
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 17:30:11 +0200

Hi Bob, thanks for the feedback.

On 08/13/2012 04:11 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Aug 2012, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> 
>> The API to specify the formats of distribution tarballs has been changed
>> completely, in a BACKWARD-INCOMPATIBLE way.
>>
>> Instead of using the various 'dist-*' automake options, the developer is
>> now expected to specify the default formats of its distribution tarballs
>> with the special variable AM_DIST_FORMATS; for example, where once would
>> have been:
>>
>>    AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE([dist-bzip2 dist-zip])
>>
>> now it must be:
>>
>>    AM_DIST_FORMATS = gzip bzip2 zip
>>
>> and similarly, where once would have been:
>>
>>    AUTOMAKE_OPTIONS = no-dist-gzip dist-bzip2 dist-xz
>>
>> now is it simply:
>>
>>    AM_DIST_FORMATS = bzip2 xz
> 
> This all sounds like goodness to me.  Moving to Automake-NG will clearly
> be a "port" for any significant project.  Hopefully you are recording
> porting-notes so that people know what to look for and change.
>
Yep; so far, it's in the NG-NEWS file.  Eventually, if that file
grows too much, we might want to consider turning it in a real
"porting" or "transition" manual (Texinfo and all).  We'll see.

> The old way of dealing with tarballs was broken because it was
> inflexible and therefore not as "free" as it should be.
>
Note that my set of patches doesn't yet offer any public API for
the addition of new distribution format; but the new form of the
codebase should at least make that very easy to add (it's mostly
a matter of changing the name of few so far internal-only
variables, and adding the proper documentation).

> It caused tension among free software developers (e.g. the 'lzip'
> discussion). Automake can not anticipate all of the possible
> output formats that a package may want to create.
>
Heartily agreed.

> For example, my project also wants to be able to produce 'srpm'
> format as well as a '7z' format.
>
That could be a nice test bed for the API, if you want to become
an early Automake-NG adopter ;-)

Regards,
  Stefano




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]