Re: [Chicken-users] More on Packaging eggs

[Peter Bex]

On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 04:50:53PM -0400, Jim Pryor wrote:
> A few packages I didn't try to package. I'd appreciate any guidance
> about these---be it "yes, that's deprecated don't try to package it" or
> "yes, that's not ready yet, don't try to package it" or "that should be
> distributable, after all."
> 
>     *   The wiki says wiki-parse is "unsupported or redundant." Anyone want
>     to expand on that? Anyway, I didn't try to package it.

wiki-parse was and initial attempt to tweak what was originally a parser
by Alex Shinn for mediawiki syntax, so that it could read svnwiki syntax.
This turned out to be too hard, and Jim had already written his own wiki
parser (svnwiki-sxml) for Chicken-doc, so we decided to drop wiki-parse
and use svnwiki-sxml for qwiki.

If Alex still wants to support it (I wouldn't recommend it, we've hacked
this egg beyond all recognition), he could remove this marking.

>     *   The following have (hidden) declarations in the meta file, so I'm
>     guessing they're not for packaging. None of them are on the wiki page,
>     either: 9ML-toolkit, ext-direct, log5scm, mime, qwiki, termite

whoops, qwiki is not supposed to be hidden anymore!  Thanks for bringing
this to my attention; I've removed the hidden marking.  This should cause
it to appear on the egg index page.  It has its own wiki page, by the
way: http://wiki.call-cc.org/eggref/4/qwiki

> Those are the packages I didn't try to package. Here's one I did
> package:
> 
>     *   colorize isn't on the wiki page, however it is a dependency of hyde,
>     which is on the wiki page. So I did package colorize.

I checked, and it appears I was using the wrong category name (www instead
of web).  It should show up in the index now.  Thanks again ;)
It too has a manual page: http://wiki.call-cc.org/eggref/4/colorize

> And here are some I wasn't able to package, despite trying:
> 
>     epeg

What exactly went wrong with epeg?

>     phoghorn

I assume this didn't work because it depends on epeg?

> If anyone wants to look at build scripts and make suggestions for these
> last ones, great. If not, I just won't bother with them.
> 
> I welcome feedback or corrections about any of this.

Thanks a lot for taking the time to do this.  This will increase
the quality of our eggs a lot!

Cheers,
Peter
-- 
http://sjamaan.ath.cx
--
"The process of preparing programs for a digital computer
 is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically
 and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic
 experience much like composing poetry or music."
                                                        -- Donald Knuth