Re: [Quilt-dev] Re: My current quilt 0.21 :)

[James Rowe]

Hey

On Wed, 29 Jan 2003 10:48:14 +0100
Martin Quinson <address@hidden> wrote:

> I did remove the misc directory on the way. 

  Yeah, there was absolutely no point to that check out of my tree being
anywhere really.  There is nothing in there that is of any use
anymore, especially with respect to current quilt.  (even to me as about
60% of it has been redone).

> So, do we reached the point where you can use the savannah cvs as your
> developpement cvs? It would prevent us from the risk of forking, and
> we could also work on this, not only you ;)

  Or atleast allow me to push my now massive fork in to the bin over the
coming weeks depending on the comments below.  Looks stable enough
already that it could be time to start enforcing the changeover on my
users soon, so I don't have to answer another ~weird~ mail about
incorrect patch applies/sums for bloody Solaris users who can't read.

> James, how does it looks like for you ? Could you add your thought to
> the TODO file ?

  It would be really nice for to have named tagged to the items in TODO,
so you see quickly that nobody else is working on that particular item. 

  I really need prettier support for a global out of tree quilt data
source, so that is the highest thing on that list for me(unless of
course 'Test if patches/ can be moved with environment variable as
planned.' wasn't referring to that. But still... before I carry on I
need to reiterate some points from a unanswered mail last week.

  I am going to continue supporting the autotools build system
locallly, as much for portability as, for sensibility during install.
Perl location, patch location/version(especially for systems like
Solaris, or users who have a 2.0.x) and to a lesser extent bash(if you
count SGI box I am exporting this sylpheed to now) are some of the
immediate issues. Of course, these issues can be achieved with the
current static Makefile with some effort, but personally I don't think
it is the way to go.  

  The portability issue applies to a few other areas in quilt too,
specifically tempfile creation(but that is an issue for a mail after I
get my work done).

  So really to sum up and finalise:
        It seems nice and stable(although I couldn't try any rpm-based
features)
        Before we pounce on anything in the TODO list we should be atleast
submitting a mail to -dev saying so.
        Has anybody got any reasons for not using docbook for the manpages?  I
plan on starting on some documentation tomorrow, and would prefer to
use docbook for simplicity.  Could make life easier for site information
generation if/when that time comes.  But for the meantime it makes
little difference to me anyway, as a quick transform to man for
inclusion is possible if there are objections.
        And again, quilt should be outputting full --help information but I
would like to see some agreement on this before I implement it. 
Especially as there are other things I could be doing instead.

Jay

-- 

www.jnrowe.uklinux.net
GnuPG key fingerprint = 7721 D12B 822B 20FE FCE6  B2B7 7CDF C9DF D16A
87D7

pgpTPJ_xCI2uA.pgp
Description: PGP signature