sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Discussion of Spells and Grimoire items
List archive
Re: [SM-Grimoire] Re: PERFORCE change 24280 for review
- From: Robin Cook <rcook AT wyrms.net>
- To: sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Grimoire] Re: PERFORCE change 24280 for review
- Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 02:48:23 -0600
I was with Jose. From the discussion it was up to the Guru of that
section as to how to handle it until after 1.0.
CuZnDragon
Robin Cook
On Sat, 2004-01-03 at 15:48, Hamish Greig wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> that was a seperate issue as I understood it.
> the first issue was if the change was as small as this cdrdao spell then it
> should be a PREPARE query not a seperate spell that needs extra
> maintainance,
> conflicts, provides and a knowledge of available spells.
> the second issue that you are referrring to I understood was whether sorcery
> needed to support cvs/stable version dependent spell scripts within the same
> spell.
> I had already stated I thought any restructuring or addditions in this
> respect
> should wait until post 1.0 and I had also understood there was agreement
> that
> unless the cvs version was warranted due to different DEPENDS, then it
> should
> always be integrated. Therefore I had no reason to respond, nor did anyone
> else ?
>
> I think adding PROVIDES, CONFLICTS changing DEPENDS of other spells and
> actually adding another spell to the grimoire is the less efficient method.
> A query in PREPARE and a
> "if ["$CVS" = "YES" ]; then VERSION=FOO-cvs ; else VERSION=FOO; fi"
> in DETAILS would definitely be the quickest and simplest.
> Especially if it is not a spell you will be maintaining, then it should be
> an
> addition to the original spell. Adding spells means more maintenance, more
> CONFLICTS and more PROVIDES. Rewriting spells as was discussed doesn't
> introduce any of these overheads.
> If I was wrong in my understanding of the previously raped and pillaged
> thread
> (I have just reread it, and all it's child threads) then I would actually
> like to readdress the issue( in a single thread ffs).
> Hamish
>
> ps I have cc'ed grimoire list as I actually want clarification of the
> previous
> thread.
>
> On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 04:40, Jose Bernardo Silva wrote:
> > --- Hamish Greig <hgreig AT bigpond.net.au> wrote: >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >
> > > Hash: SHA1
> > >
> > > I believe this should have been integrated into the
> > > regular spell.
> > > the only differences are the download and one line
> > > in BUILD, this is a good
> > > example of what was discussed a few weeks ago.
> > > Hamish
> >
> > AFAIK, that discussion ended with a message by Arwed,
> > dated December 10th, which wasn't contested, that
> > stated:
> >
> > "Nicely put, even counting the recent additions to
> > audio and sergejs combined spells it's not even 1% of
> > our grimoire. So i think until our 1.0 release every
> > guru should do whatever works best for his spells."
> >
> > Has there been any more recent decision that I didn't
> > know of?
> >
> > =====
> > Jose Bernardo Silva | Source Mage GNU/Linux Guru
> > josebernardo1 AT yahoo.com | http://www.sourcemage.org
> > http://counter.li.org #245602
> > http://cosmos.oninetspeed.pt/jose.bernardo/
> >
> > ________________________________________________________________________
> > Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping"
> > your friends today! Download Messenger Now
> > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html
>
> - --
> IRC nick: drmoriarty
> SMGL co-conspirator
> # Do You SMGL!?
> # http://www.sourcemage.org/
> # Linux so advanced it may as well be magic!
> ANTI-SPAM WARNING: I delete any html message from my server without reading
> Please use text only
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQE/9zin8fSufZR6424RAtxUAJ9o834VbOQj1WUutbHWFYR9jD7bFACeKtC9
> 1EDRDpGl1oYZaTwo2Uu+Y+o=
> =st2s
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Grimoire mailing list
> SM-Grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-grimoire
>
-
[SM-Grimoire] Re: PERFORCE change 24280 for review,
Hamish Greig, 01/03/2004
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] Re: PERFORCE change 24280 for review, Sergey A. Lipnevich, 01/03/2004
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] Re: PERFORCE change 24280 for review,
Robin Cook, 01/04/2004
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] Re: PERFORCE change 24280 for review, Hamish Greig, 01/05/2004
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] Re: PERFORCE change 24280 for review, Eric Sandall, 01/04/2004
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] Re: PERFORCE change 24280 for review,
Ricardo Izquierdo, 01/04/2004
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] Re: PERFORCE change 24280 for review, Casey Harkins, 01/04/2004
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] Re: PERFORCE change 24280 for review,
Ricardo Izquierdo, 01/05/2004
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] Re: PERFORCE change 24280 for review, Hamish Greig, 01/05/2004
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.