ArchOSX timeline
Kevin Barry
I'm itching to start distributing binaries. Tom is looking to get us
some server space which would be great. What do people think our plan
of action should be? Get the space and load the binaries and "go
public"? Or get the space but keep it private for testing everything
ourselves first? Should we have any milestones before we consider it
public? I feel good about the current package set. We have lots of
unix stuff Mac doesn't ship with, we have updated versions of
apply-shipped unix software. And we have a few Mac Only (LaTeXiT and
AquaTerm) pieces of software but that fit nicely with other software
we provide.
-Kevin
Loic Nageleisen
On 14 Feb 2009, at 22:32, Kevin Barry wrote:
>
> Hi guys,
>
> I'm itching to start distributing binaries. Tom is looking to get us
> some server space which would be great.
That's a good first step!
> What do people think our plan
> of action should be? Get the space and load the binaries and "go
> public"? Or get the space but keep it private for testing everything
> ourselves first?
Private first, to test the first milestone.
> Should we have any milestones before we consider it
> public?
First, as most users just don't RTFM, they should be able to naively:
- download the .pkg
- do pacman -Syu
- do their first pacman -S their_favorite_available_package
and have it working without a single glitch. We have to test that as
much as possible.
Second, we need to put up some doc in googlecode project wiki,
indicating:
- the philosophy behind the project
- the project boundaries
- its relation to archlinux
- its limitations
- what/how/where it installs
- a basic install guide
- a basic usage scenario guide
- a basic stay up to date guide
Even if this states the obvious (like install procedure) we have to do
it. This will:
- put up confidence in the project, what it installs and how it works
- make up for people coming from a sole linux background
- make up for people coming from a sole mac background
Only then can we push the switch.
> I feel good about the current package set. We have lots of
> unix stuff Mac doesn't ship with, we have updated versions of
> apply-shipped unix software. And we have a few Mac Only (LaTeXiT and
> AquaTerm) pieces of software but that fit nicely with other software
> we provide.
Yeah that makes for a nice roundup of what the project can do and aims
to do.
-Loic
>
>
> -Kevin
>
> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "arch-osx" group.
> To post to this group, send email to arch...@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to arch-osx+u...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/arch-osx?hl=en
> -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
>
Tom Wambold
>> I'm itching to start distributing binaries. Tom is looking to get us
>> some server space which would be great.
>
> That's a good first step!
>> What do people think our plan
>> of action should be? Get the space and load the binaries and "go
>> public"? Or get the space but keep it private for testing everything
>> ourselves first?
>
> Private first, to test the first milestone.
fresh system and testing everything.
> Second, we need to put up some doc in googlecode project wiki, indicating:
> - the philosophy behind the project
> - the project boundaries
> - its relation to archlinux
> - its limitations
> - what/how/where it installs
> - a basic install guide
> - a basic usage scenario guide
> - a basic stay up to date guide
I still need to find a way to build the devtools package, along with a
script to bootstrap the installer.
Good job everyone!
-Tom
Kevin Barry
> fresh system and testing everything.
now it will pull ArchOSX's macosx_xcode when you need a package that
requires it, but macosx_xcode is merely a dummy package. We could put
a note in there with a link to Apple's XCode site asking people to
install. Maybe we could have the package fail to install if they don't
actually have Apple's XCode installed.
Loic Nageleisen
On 15 Feb 2009, at 17:58, Tom Wambold wrote:
>
> Hey all:
>
>>> I'm itching to start distributing binaries. Tom is looking to get us
>>> some server space which would be great.
>>
>> That's a good first step!
>
> Yep! Hopefully, this should be ready sometime this week.
>
Any status update?
On my side not much has been done, but I've been testing package
building (with rev. 120 tree) on the packages I still had with
macports. Only one build issue came up, with texlive-bin where a
md5sum ended up wrong, and one package that refused to fetch. Apart
from that, everything is fine and I finally busted macports from my MBP.
-Loic
Tom Wambold
<loic.na...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Any status update?
Unfortunately I still have not heard anything from the university.
I'll be sure to ask my friend what is going on next time I talk to
him.
> On my side not much has been done, but I've been testing package building
> (with rev. 120 tree) on the packages I still had with macports. Only one
> build issue came up, with texlive-bin where a md5sum ended up wrong, and one
> package that refused to fetch. Apart from that, everything is fine and I
> finally busted macports from my MBP.
Great to hear! Since rev 120, I've added a bunch more core packages,
and removed the "macosx" package, as all the things it provided are
now separate packages.
If you have any packages to contribute, feel free to check them into
SVN, following the same directory structure for the other packages.
-Tom
Loic Nageleisen
Will do. I notably intend to package gnupg, and other little utilities
like upslug2 and httptunnel.
-Loic
Stythys
this along.
I made an IRC chan for anyone that wants live collaboration (#arch-osx
on freendode), and I've started an actual site for us to use:
http://arch-osx.twilightlair.net
Again, since we have a host for binary packages now I'd like to start
getting our devs organized and start getting some packages uploaded!
=]
What do you guys think?
> 3KViewDownload
Kevin Barry
I think we have a great collection of PKGBUILDs and most of them are probably ready for use. And we're going to learn a lot after going-live so to speak so I think it's fine for us to make a beta or 0.1 release soon even if we have some major mistakes or design flaws.
What is the process for moving a package from trunk to a release? I know Archlinux uses a tagging method and Tom was planning on following the same. I'm supportive of that.
-KB
Tom Wambold
> on freendode)
Nice!
> and I've started an actual site for us to use:
> http://arch-osx.twilightlair.net
Is there anything this gives us over the Google Code page? I'd rather
not have two sites going at the same time.
Otherwise, sounds good.
-Tom
Stythys
host ourselves with software like redmine than a hosted service like
google.
Since we have our own server, we don't have to rely on their services;
to be honest, I'd prefer to switch from svn to git. Every other
project I'm working on with archlinux users also support it.
As for releasing packages, I'm not too familiar with the process arch
devs use, so I can't comment much there. Arch has the [testing] repo
for, well, testing packages, right? We could do something similar.
On Apr 16, 6:48 pm, Tom Wambold <tom5...@gmail.com> wrote:
Tom Wambold
> Since we have our own server, we don't have to rely on their services;
> to be honest, I'd prefer to switch from svn to git. Every other
> project I'm working on with archlinux users also support it.
could just move completely over to that.
> As for releasing packages, I'm not too familiar with the process arch
> devs use, so I can't comment much there.
package directory. Each directory in "repos" corresponds to a package
repository, it acts as a "tag" for the PKGBUILD in "trunk".
I'm not sure how this sort of thing will translate to Git. Would we
have different branches for each package? Maybe we don't need to
worry about this right now.
-Tom
Stythys
it comes to that, so I haven't got my server configured to run mailing
lists yet. If anyone has experience with that here, any help would
definitely be appreciated.
As for the svn -> git move, tagging in git is actually much more
powerful. Here's a tutorial that should help: http://git.or.cz/course/svn.html#branch
On Apr 16, 7:23 pm, Tom Wambold <tom5...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Since we have our own server, we don't have to rely on their services;
> > to be honest, I'd prefer to switch from svn to git. Every other
> > project I'm working on with archlinux users also support it.
>
> I agree. Can we get mailing lists on there too? If so, I suppose we
> could just move completely over to that.
>
> > As for releasing packages, I'm not too familiar with the process arch
> > devs use, so I can't comment much there.
>
> The Arch SVN server has a "trunk" and a "repos" directory in each
> package directory. Each directory in "repos" corresponds to a package
> repository, it acts as a "tag" for the PKGBUILD in "trunk".
>
> I'm not sure how this sort of thing will translate to Git. Would we
> have different branches for each package? Maybe we don't need to
> worry about this right now.
>
> -Tom
>
Stythys
uploading packages...anyone who wants to help read our wiki page:
http://twilightlair.net:3000/projects/arch-osx/wiki/GIT
Kevin Barry
What do we do when we upload a binary release? Tag the PKGBUILD revision and then increment the release number of trunk's PKGBUILD?
Also Stythys can you setup myself, Tom and Loic up as developers?
Stythys
folder with <package>-stable. I think this is mentioned at the bottom
of the git wiki page.
As for setting up developers, again just follow the git wiki page.
Setup a github account and let me know your account name so you can
have push/pull access, and when you sign up on the arch-osx website,
again just lemme know your users and I can set your status.
On Apr 18, 4:47 pm, Kevin Barry <bar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm all for moving quickly to binaries, and I'm okay with the switch to git
> as I plan to learn it anyway. But I do think we need to have some plan
> before we go-live.
>
> What do we do when we upload a binary release? Tag the PKGBUILD revision and
> then increment the release number of trunk's PKGBUILD?
>
> Also Stythys can you setup myself, Tom and Loic up as developers?
>
Loic Nageleisen
On 17 Apr 2009, at 05:06, Stythys wrote:
>
> Yes we can get mailing lists...unfortunately I'm a bit of a noob when
> it comes to that, so I haven't got my server configured to run mailing
> lists yet. If anyone has experience with that here, any help would
> definitely be appreciated.
especially as google groups works wonders and MLs can be a real pain
to maintain.
Loic
Tom Wambold
<loic.na...@gmail.com> wrote:
> well, I'm not sure setting up maiing lists is worth the trouble,
> especially as google groups works wonders and MLs can be a real pain
I just forked Stythys' repo. I think we should break it up into two
repos, one for the packages, and one for the "tools". Maybe if we get
a few more well developed tools, they should go in their own
repositories later.
Here is the tools repo: http://github.com/tom5760/arch-osx-tools
> let me know your account name so you can have push/pull access
-Tom
Stythys
forks. Which ones are we going to use exactly?
On Apr 19, 11:42 am, Tom Wambold <tom5...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Loic Nageleisen
>
Stythys
I mean I can't really think of a reason to scatter the repos, but it
doesn't really matter. What do people here want to do?
Tom Wambold
>
> Well, now we have three github repos =/. We have mine, and your two
> forks. Which ones are we going to use exactly?
distributed source control, isnt it? We pick one to be the "main"
repo, and we work on all the others, and submit push requests to main.
This way, we can have one person in charge of taking care of these
push requests, to make sure they work, and don't break anything. This
is pretty much how the Linux kernel development works. Linus has his
master repo, and everyone sends him pull requests.
It doesn't matter to me who has the "main" repo. But if we are going
to use git, it makes sense to use it in a distributed fashion. If we
just want to use one repo, we might as well stick with subversion.
-Tom
Stythys
take care of the rest. Everyone who sent me their github users should
go ahead and forward them to Tom then, and you should already know
mine
On Apr 19, 12:31 pm, Tom Wambold <tom5...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Well, now we have three github repos =/. We have mine, and your two
> > forks. Which ones are we going to use exactly?
>
> Having separate repos for different developers is kinda the point of
> distributed source control, isnt it? We pick one to be the "main"
> repo, and we work on all the others, and submit push requests to main.
> This way, we can have one person in charge of taking care of these
> push requests, to make sure they work, and don't break anything. This
> is pretty much how the Linux kernel development works. Linus has his
> master repo, and everyone sends him pull requests.
>
> It doesn't matter to me who has the "main" repo. But if we are going
> to use git, it makes sense to use it in a distributed fashion. If we
> just want to use one repo, we might as well stick with subversion.
>
> -Tom
>
Tom Wambold
> alrighty, sounds good. Since you've already forked them you can just
> take care of the rest. Everyone who sent me their github users should
> go ahead and forward them to Tom then, and you should already know
> mine
double check them, and maybe build them just in case.
So does that mean I'm the integrator-person? :) I think it should be fun.
Do you want to put my git repo as the main one?
Also, we should probably break this into its own thread on the mailing list...
-Tom
Aman Gupta
repositories?
Aman
Stythys
On Apr 19, 12:48 pm, Aman Gupta <themastermi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm all for forks, but why split out tools and packages into separate
> repositories?
>
> Aman
>
> > On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Stythys <twilight.l...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> alrighty, sounds good. Since you've already forked them you can just
> >> take care of the rest. Everyone who sent me their github users should
> >> go ahead and forward them to Tom then, and you should already know
> >> mine
>
> > Actually, just send me push requests when you have changes. I'll
> > double check them, and maybe build them just in case.
>
> > So does that mean I'm the integrator-person? :) I think it should be fun.
>
> > Do you want to put my git repo as the main one?
>
> > Also, we should probably break this into its own thread on the mailing list...
>
> > -Tom
>