incubator-bloodhound-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Olemis Lang <ole...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: moving towards initial release
Date Thu, 05 Jul 2012 02:00:05 GMT
On 7/4/12, Gary Martin <gary.martin@wandisco.com> wrote:
> On 07/02/2012 10:54 PM, Olemis Lang wrote:
>> On 7/2/12, Gary Martin <gary.martin@wandisco.com> wrote:
>>> Anyway, as a fundamental part of a release is that it consists of the
>>> necessary source to build the project, we need to make sure that our
>>> installer is fit for the task of installing in that form, or, at least,
>>> we give adequate instructions for how the project is built without using
>>> the simple installer. Either way, changes to the installer should be
>>> expected.
>>>
>> About this I wanted to suggest you to take a look at Trac's Makefile .
>> That approach seems to be connsistent with Trac develeopment workflow
>> and afaics might help to build packages for specific platforms and
>> environments (e.g. Linux dpkg , rpm ... , Windows msi , exe ...
>> database PostgreSQL , SQLite , ... and so on ) . Maybe it'd be nice to
>> add new Bloodhound-specific targets in there e.g. bloodhound_configure
>> bloodhound_install , ...
>
> Well, we can already create binary and source distributions with
> distutils.

... for individual plugins , yes ... but for the whole Bloodhound
solution it seems it'd be nice to have (/me thinking in terms of
debian packages ...) some kind of bloodhound meta-package installing
bloodhound-* packages for

  1. modified Trac code
  2. theme , dashboard , multiproduct , ... plugins .

Top level package (i.e. bloodhound) being just a lightweight solution
responsible of installing needed dependencies (i.e. 1 and 2 above ;),
use appropriate configuration , ... and these kinds of tasks beyond
individual packages themselves . Right now these are implemented in
the installer . Even if not implemented exactly like this , well ...
just a suggestion
;)

> It might be nice to have a buildout recipe for installation
> as well for an alternative installation and setup.
>

+1
:)

[...]
>
> Anyway, there is no particular requirement for binary distributions to
> be made available though we could consider whether this would be good
> for future releases.
>

+1

-- 
Regards,

Olemis.

Blog ES: http://simelo-es.blogspot.com/
Blog EN: http://simelo-en.blogspot.com/

Featured article:

Mime
View raw message