[sugar] did the recent launch changes get into a build?
Sun Oct 14 00:52:48 EDT 2007
Albert Calahan wrote:
> These don't have ChangeLog files.
Fixing this is our top priority build-system work (where "us" currently
means cjb, c_scott, and m_stone, though others are welcome to
contribute!). To summarize our current thinking:
* In order to get good ChangeLog data, we think we should refuse to
include packages that don't include ChangeLog entries.
* We will generate a list of packages that were not included because
of missing ChangeLog entries so it will be very obvious if your
package was not included.
* In the future, we will try to parse RPM ChangeLogs, activity NEWS
files, &etc; however, in the short term, we're just going to examine
the file public_rpms/<branch>/ChangeLog
* We have agreed that the first person who implements a working
ChangeLog parser-aggregator shall decide the exact format of this
> If I later run the autoupdater, what is the installed version
> going to look like? (will the autoupdater refuse to run?)
I don't understand your question well enough to answer it; can you
please rephrase it?
In particular, to what does "autoupdater" refer? The "olpc-update"
incremental network updater?
The autoreinstallation Forth script (typically run from USB)?
> BTW, next time you might want to branch off for the
> stable stuff instead of branching off for development.
> Things tend to stay neater that way, especially if you
> can't easily declare a stable branch to be dead for good.
"Branching" is a bit of an oversimplification of the actual arrangement,
which is more like a "layering" than a "branching".
Nevertheless, thanks for the advice.
More information about the Sugar-devel