Re: Having the same contents on gnu.org and sf.net

[Guido Draheim]

Peter Simons wrote:
> Guido Draheim writes:
> 
>  >> Wouldn't it be beneficial if Guido's archive would
>  >> generate its presentation from the _same_ CVS repository
>  >> as gnu.org does?
> 
>  > (a) killing the duplication would be nice but my systems
>  >     works by making a cvs snapshot with rpmbuild -ta *.tar.
>  >     How to get the gnu macros into the snapshot tar
>  >     then...
> 
> I am sorry, but I don't understand the problem. Why is this
> difficult?


How to build the tarball. Currently, I can just cvs checkout,
then run `make` and point may browser to the local directory
to see what the website will look like. I can do a checkout
everywhere but for those areas where i do not have cvs access
(like some corporate environment) I can just take a cvs
snapshot, unpack the tarball, and do the same all over again,
even run `make install` or `make rpm` on the tarball wherever
that may be. Where is the tarball-in-my-pocket mode for the
gnu ac-archive? If it is there I can just add my patches on
top of it but more probably I'd just drop sfnet altogether.
I don't see a reason to maintain a second formatting pipeline,
IT IS - NOT - MY - FOCUS. What's the benefit in all those
intermediate stages - you want me to have a build dependency
on the gnu ac-archive and on the next corner you move all
the build processing again to your private corners, shuffling
directories around and trying a catch-up strategy on the world?
The best way to calm down my FUD is to show me your build system
allowing me to check how I can put my things in, how can I use
it offsite, and thus finally allowing me to drop sfnet. SHOW IT.

> 
> 
>  > (b) There are macros in the sfnet branch that are purely
>  >     experimental, I was not aware of how the gnu archive
>  >     does mark experimentals anyway.
> 
> I don't mind having experimental macros at gnu.org at all!
> How do you mark them at sf.net? I'll just support the same
> syntax here, and then you can commit them into the CVS
> repository unmodified. Okay?
> 
> 
>  > (c) I am submitting macros to savannah already, those
>  > experimentals can go there when the processing is going
>  > to be defined to an acceptable degree.
> 
> Like I said above: Please don't hesitate to add the
> experimental macros to the gnu.org CVS repository. I'll
> adapt my software to cope with your markup, that's no
> problem.
> 
> 
>  > We are currently in the making of archive unification, if
>  > the gnu ac-archive build files are in place I can start
>  > dropping the sfnet build and sync processing - in that
>  > order.
> 
> Well, my primary concern is that both sf.net and gnu.org
> should build from the same repository of _macros_, because
> everything else is asking for inconsistencies which will
> confuse the user. If we could get that solved right now, it
> would be great!
> 
> If we could get the macros that only sf.net has right now
> added into the gnu.org CVS repository, it would be a great
> step forward IMHO.
> 
> Peter
> 
> 
> --
> Macro Archive maintainer's mailing list
> 
> 

-- 
-- guido                                  http://google.de/search?q=guidod
GCS/E/S/P C++/++++$ ULHS L++w- N++@ s+:a d(+-) r+@>+++ y++ 5++X- (geekcode)