[gnap-dev] State of the union

[gnap-dev] State of the union

[Philipp Riegger]

Hi everybody!

We just created gnap-dev on Google Code:
http://code.google.com/p/gnap-dev/
So please drop us (Andrey or me) a line and we will add you to the
project.

Furthermore we added gnap-dev as email address where all svn commits
will be sent. This is ok, i guess, because this is a development list.
And it is too much overhead to create an extra list for that. I filed a
bug to get these messages whitelisted:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=223551

Next thing: I'd like to reorganize the repository and the ebuilds. I
would like to split it the other way around than they are at the moment.
I'd like to have:

A) One ebuild called gnap, that installes all gnap_* scripts,
documentation and examples.

B) ebuilds of the form gnap-x86-uclibc, gnap-x86-glibc,
gnap-x86-uclibc-hardened,... for each target we support containing a
seedstage, build gnap base fs, maybe prebuilt extensions and the portage
snapshot. We could controll the installation of prebuild extensions,
prebuilt base fs and maybe other stuff with USE-flags. We could also
split the portage snapshot into an extra ebuild in case multiple targets
share the same one.

A should have regular version numbers, like 2.0, 2.1, whatever, B should
only have dates as version.

Comments?

Thanks,
	Philipp



-- 
gnap-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gnap-dev] State of the union

[josé Alberto Suárez López]

Hi,

thanks for your work :) so please next time confirm things like this
with me, in the last email i told you i was creating the repository and
than i will wait last week for a reply about the name. I was creating
this morning the new repository when i readed your email.

El dom, 25-05-2008 a las 14:47 +0200, Philipp Riegger escribió:
> Hi everybody!
> 
> We just created gnap-dev on Google Code:
> http://code.google.com/p/gnap-dev/
> So please drop us (Andrey or me) a line and we will add you to the
> project.
> 
> Furthermore we added gnap-dev as email address where all svn commits
> will be sent. This is ok, i guess, because this is a development list.
> And it is too much overhead to create an extra list for that. I filed a
> bug to get these messages whitelisted:
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=223551
> 
> Next thing: I'd like to reorganize the repository and the ebuilds. I
> would like to split it the other way around than they are at the moment.
> I'd like to have:
> 
> A) One ebuild called gnap, that installes all gnap_* scripts,
> documentation and examples.
> 
> B) ebuilds of the form gnap-x86-uclibc, gnap-x86-glibc,
> gnap-x86-uclibc-hardened,... for each target we support containing a
> seedstage, build gnap base fs, maybe prebuilt extensions and the portage
> snapshot. We could controll the installation of prebuild extensions,
> prebuilt base fs and maybe other stuff with USE-flags. We could also
> split the portage snapshot into an extra ebuild in case multiple targets
> share the same one.
> 
> A should have regular version numbers, like 2.0, 2.1, whatever, B should
> only have dates as version.
> 
> Comments?
> 
> Thanks,
> 	Philipp
> 
> 
> 

--
gnap-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list