On 6/20/07, Joel B. Mohler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Anyhow, the new package for sage_c_lib gets a bit confusing because we had a > mercurial repository for the actual development of the sage_c_lib in the > original sage_c_lib spkg. The new spkg spec calls for a mercurial repository > for the spkg-* scripts in the root of the spkg. Do we want both of these > mercurial repositories in the spkg?
> 2) Have a single mercurial repository for both the spkg-* scripts and the > actual code in the src/ subdirectory. +1. This is basically what the spkg looks like now: Header files, src/ subdir, configure, Makefile, spkg-install, etc are all in a single repo. > 3) Keep the actual code source control outside the spkg and release > non-version controlled tarballs from this to be packaged in the spkg. +0. This would be ideal but requires that someone has to worry about making a separate package for sage_c_lib (by running "hg archive" periodically, for example. Maybe this could be a cron job?) didier --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
