cygwin-pkg-maint maintance

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Aug 14 22:28, Marco Atzeri wrote:
> On 14/08/2014 21:21, Achim Gratz wrote:
> >Yaakov Selkowitz writes:
> >>This is a package ownership database, not a package information
> >>database.  What additional information do you think would be useful
> >>here?
> >
> >Whether the package is available for both architectures
> 
> Wrong expectation.
> It is in both architectures if it appears in both setup.ini;
> any other solution will create duplicated information that finally
> need alignment and it is error prone.
> 
> I plan to produce a list of sources by arch as by product of
> the current analysis.
> 
> Please note that the two trees are not exactly equal so there are
> packages available only in 64 and not in 32bit
> (biber is the first in alphabetical order)
> 
> 
> >and if it's
> >already converted to cygport for instance.  From that database the
> >current file can easily be created if necessary and any manual changes
> >to the file could bootstrap a new entry in the database (so the new
> >maintainer can upload).
> 
> The build methods is maintainer choice.
> I use cygport but I don't see a reason to mandate it.

Tiny correction:  New packages should use cygport.  We should really all
use the same packaging system.  After all, you don't use rpm files on
Debian or dpkg files on Fedora.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin-apps/attachments/20140814/7eb5c53c/attachment.sig>