[Review - Not yet] tcm
Daniel Boesswetter
daniel@daniel-boesswetter.de
Thu Nov 27 19:04:00 GMT 2003
Hi Harold,
1) yes, my changes are very likely to be integrated into the original
TCM distribution (most are in fact already included there).
2) I created a build script now and rebuilt the source and binary
packages, available from the usual URLs
(http://home.in.tum.de/~boesswet/tcm_cygwin.html)
The latest official TCM source (2.20) already contains lots of my
changes (#if'ed where necessary). The reason for patch to this source is
mostly to make it conform to the cygwin packaging-rules (and some
general bug fixes). The reason for the huge size of the patch (400k)
was, that the original source is not "clean" (because some
yacc-generated files are contained in the archive that are removed by
"make clean"). I changed this manually and the new patch is only 93k
BTW: The binary package has also been available from the TCM download
page at http://wwwhome.cs.utwente.nl/~tcm/ since January and now makes
approx. 30% of all binary downloads!
Best Regards,
Daniel
Harold L Hunt II wrote:
> Daniel,
>
> I just reviewed your tcm package:
>
>> Package: tcm 2.20-1 [2003-01-27]
>> Description: Toolkit for Conceptual Modeling (TCM)
>> Proposer: Daniel Boesswetter
>> Proposal:
>> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2003-01/msg00299.html
>> http://home.in.tum.de/~boesswet/tcm-2.20-1.tar.bz2
>> http://home.in.tum.de/~boesswet/tcm-2.20-1-src.tar.bz2
>> http://home.in.tum.de/~boesswet/setup.hint
>> Good to go: Charles Wilson (cygwin-apps-thread.11851) (once problems
>> are addressed)
>> Problems: So, here's the question for the list. For the
>> cygwin-specific README in a X-related package, where should it go?
>> (cygwin-apps-thread.11851)
>> Status: Attained required 3 votes. Package available. Reviewed.
>> HOLD-UPS: Unresolved minor problems.
>
>
> Questions/Issues
> ================
>
> 1) You have made a lot of changes. Is there any chance that these
> patches will be excepted into the upstream tcm package? I'm a little
> nervous having this many changes in place that aren't properly #if'd
> since the next upstream release might not have all of this stuff and
> the packge will become unmaintained unless you are around to get those
> patches adapted for the next version.
>
> 2) There is no build script. I know that packages without build
> scripts are still allowed, and I used to make them myself since I
> thought they were really tough... but now they save me so much time
> that I won't release a package without them and I shy away from
> reviewing a package that doesn't have one. If you don't want to make
> the script, then I could make it for you (after you tell me what you
> are going to do regarding all the changes in #1).
>
>
> Awaiting your input,
>
> Harold
>
>
>
More information about the Cygwin-apps
mailing list