Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] devel / stable versions

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Sergey A. Lipnevich" <sergey AT optimaltec.com>
  • To: Eric Sandall <eric AT sandall.us>
  • Cc: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] devel / stable versions
  • Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 19:33:51 -0400

Eric Sandall wrote:
Geoffrey Derber said:
  
Kind of a request for the future.

Can we move towards having all spells be the latest STABLE release, and
for devel releases, have second copy of the spell '-devel' on the end.

This might require that dependencies be taken care of more like the
requires method.  But I think it may be better in the end.

This would eliminate the beta mozilla versions, and the beta xfree86,
several others.  But I really think unless the person wants to use a
beta version, we should not try to force it on them w/ an update.  Have
them choose the beta / development branch specifically.  Then it is the
end users choice rather than, 'oh we want to use the latest devel
version, tough luck if you want to use an older version'

Another reason for doing it this way, I'd like to see us return if
possible to a point where people can safely update with a cron job and
know what they would be getting.

Geoff
    
This is how it SHOULD be anyways.  Note that we do have some <spell>-devel
spells in sections (gimp-devel, for example).  However, sometimes we
cannot help it for when the author removes all prior versions and/or the
older versions do not work with the version of X that we have in the
grimoire.

In general, though, if we can use the 'stable' release, please do, and if
you want to have the spell at a 'devel/beta' release, create a new spell
with '-devel' or '-beta' (preferably the former).

-sandalle

  
I disagree. Having xyz and xyz-devel actually pushes /more/ complexity on users [and on us too]. On users: they have to make a decision about something they have no idea in each and every case, they may install xyz and xyz-devel together and bring havoc, they may change their mind. On us: we'll have to check all DEPENDS, introduce more `requires' and `provides' for every other spell, and generally mess the grimoires beyond comprehension. Ideal as I see it is when a spell actually offers a choice in CONFIGURE as to whether the user wants stable or unstable version. Moreover, sorcery should have a default setting for this so that users don't have to pick everything manually. Which brings us (almost) to what we have now: devel and stable grimoires, but not quite. The problem of two grimoires is that spells have the same names in both, so whichever grimoire is first in the list wins. To change that, we have to create a single grimoire and provide an option of stable/unstable in one and the same grimoire.
I've started an idea of implementing this with the Horde group of spells, horde, imp, turba, kronolith. It actually works for thew, believe it or not, but the bug in installation that I'm meaning to resolve prevents the spell from being used. So, if somebody's willing to look over these spells and make a suggestion as to whether the solution can be abstracted and made a part of sorcery, I'll be happy to explain the algorithm in spells. Most of the time, spells would only need two DETAILS files, and sorcery would choose one or the other.
How's that?

Sergey.



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page