Re: Re: 7.1 RPMs

Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> The traffic naturally peaks around release time, and this time especially
> because yours truly messed up the whole build system that the packagers
> were so careful to work around.

Now, Peter.  The build, IMHO, is much better than before -- if anything,
the fact that we had to change as much as we did shows that the previous
build system, no offense intended to anyone who worked on it :-), wasn't
'packaging friendly.'  I ripped out more special treatment than I had to
put in.  The less code in the spec, the better the spec (and the better
the package).

Now I just have to get the Python build version-agnostic and using the
regular build -- even if I have to dink with the makefiles myself. I
think the perl build, due to its two-stage needs, will remain the
special case that it is.

>  I trust that in a few weeks we'll enter a
> new quiet period.  My vote is that technical packaging discussions should
> go on -hackers just like a makefile discussion.

I tend to agree -- but at the same time I'm easy to get along with in
that regard.  Packaging envelopes the whole program -- I must see the
forest that the -hackers group has built out of trees.  And I have to
know some details of the trees occasionally.  I'm sure Oliver would
agree.

And, to let everyone know, I'm having a blast doing this. And I'm glad
my work schedule eased up some in the last month so I could put some
time to this task.
--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11