From: UnixOS2 Archive To: "UnixOS2 Archive" Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 14:07:00 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [UnixOS2_Archive] No. 125 ************************************************** Sunday 08 June 2003 Number 125 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 Re: Candidate packages : Nicholas Sheppard **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 20:38:47 +1000 (AET) From: Nicholas Sheppard Subject: Re: Candidate packages On Sun, 1 Jun 2003, Jeff Robinson wrote: > One basic assumption for inclusion (other than the software package > actually working) would be to have it packaged in the UnixOS2 package > format... but should we have a potential "staging area" for new ports of > the software to make certain we have the latest software available? For > a lot of ports that are statically linked, I don't believe there would > be too much trouble introducing them into UnixOS2 (unless the output of > them broke other applications, such as what a shell could potentially do). At the moment I am using my personal web site as the staging area for new ports but I can see the advantages in having a common area that potential alpha/beta testers can find easily. Some people may also have problems with disk quotas on their personal sites (though I've never had a problem on mine). > In addition to this, I would like to suggest (as I had a while back) > about naming UnixOS2 ports with the port name, version and an optional > 'ux2' signifier (if it contains a pkgfile). This way, if one has the > file out of context (say on their local drive) it is still easy to tell > what the file is all about. If there was a reason for not using version numbers, I've forgotten what it was. Pretty much every Unix archive I've ever seen has a version number on the end and I find that very helpful in checking whether or not the archive is more recent than that archive. I always use version numbers for anything I upload to Hobbes or put on my web site. At the moment there is a file called "pine.zip" on the UnixOS/2 site that presumably originated with me, but I couldn't tell anyone what it is without downloading it first. Furthermore, adding the -ux2 extension would differentiate the package as put out by the developer versus one that has been re-packaged and/or re-compiled specifically for UnixOS/2. Nicholas S.