My excuse for my late reaction, but you all landed up my spambox of my
provider.
Which I've solved now.
Thank you both for your reaction.
You're (Jose) right on the best practices.
In order to set up a debian packaging proces we should have or do the
following
- The web2py community should have a maintainer (group)
- Which has manage the releases repo's
- Ajust web2py for use through the repo
- example : disables the buildin update function /
splits data into the right locations etc
- We should release a debain version on short notice after the sources
release of Massimo.
- We could use http://build.opensuse.org which is/looks very good
Because the maintainer has to invest a lot of time on regular bases.
My idea is to launch a vacature for it on the community.
And have Massimo make a decide how will become the lead packager,
because he will have to work with him
I will test http://build.opensuse.org to look if it's usefull for
web2py.
My guesses is that it will be.
I hope to do the testing this weekend.
Dimo has been started to package gluon map.
For futher info on the plans. there is another post on this.
Search for debian on the web2py group and you will found a hole thread
on this.
I hope i have informed you well.
regards Mark Breedveld,
www.markbreedveld.nl
On 21 mei, 07:37, Trollkarlen <robbelibob...@gmail.com> wrote:
> For packaging i sugest using thehttp://build.opensuse.org.
> Its a service where you can package for all mager distros, and have
> them all in se same repo.
>
> /T
>
> On 18 Maj, 08:42, José L. <jredr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 17 mayo, 17:32, Mark Breedveld <m.breedv...@solcon.nl> wrote:
>
> > > I've been through the material and it's quite straight forward.
> > > So we could keep the current packaging system like it's now.
>
> > > But we both now that it ain't suitable fordebianpackaging system.
> > > So I have a tiny idea.
>
> > > We start working with a major and a tiny release.
> > > The major release will not be up to date, but a proven version.
> > > And released every quarter or half a year. Just like ubuntu.
>
> > > This we make it easier for companies to offer long term support.
> > > Which is an important issue for customers.
>
> > > It also shows that web2py has reached the status of an mature
> > > webserver/framework.
>
> > > My excuse for the long waiting for my answer, but I starting my own
> > > business.
> > > While I'm also busy with school.
>
> > > But I've made request on Hogeschool Rotterdam to support web2py.
> > > And they where very positieve, so I keep you all posted.
>
> > > regards Mark Breedveld,
>
> > > On Apr 20, 7:06 pm, Mark Breedveld <m.breedv...@solcon.nl> wrote:
>
> > > > Thank you very much,
> > > > This are some of the answers I was looking for.
>
> > > > I'll dive into it, tomorrow.
> > > > But this gives me an idea about how the release cicle is done.
> > > > And how we could implement thedebianpackages in it.
>
> > > > Which has been discussed in an
> > > > earlier.http://groups.google.com/group/web2py/browse_frm/thread/51b731d9abb52...
> > > > This might give an idea why we want to package web2py.
>
> > > > And the reason I started this post was because I had the same
> > > > questions as you.
> > > > The frequent releases of Massimo etc.
> > > > More than enough to discuss,
> > > > but first I'll study the answer you give me and come up with an idea
> > > > == more questions :p.
>
> > > > regards
>
> > > > Mark Breedveld,
>
> > I've found this thread of discussion today. I'am an officialDebian
> > developer and was thinking also of packaging web2py forDebian, but
> > I've begun to use web2py only a few weeks ago and I prefer to know
> > more the framework before trying to package it.
> > Anyway, if I've understood it correctly, I've read in this thread that
> > you're planning to add the debianization to the web2py sources, so the
> > package can be created easily. That's a bad practice from theDebian
> > point of view, and package maintainers encourage upstream not to do
> > it, unless upstream is the package maintainer. In fact, it's very
> > usual that, if upstream sources contain adebiandirectory, the
> > maintainer removes it before adding the definitive one.
>
> > The oficial maintainer must know and modify the debianization all the
> > time, so he (or they) are who must write it, not upstream. It's the
> > maintainer responsability having it in a good shape inside thedebian
> > repository.
>
> > On the other hand, I've also read that you plan to recheck the package
> > every quarter of a year. That's not a good practice either, the
> > package should be checked when it's needed. I.e: everytime a new
> > upstream version is released, on when a bug in the packaging is
> > discovered.
>
> > If you want to do theDebianpackage for web2py I recommend you fill a
> > ITP (Intend to Package) bug in bugs.debian.org, so you'll be the
> > official maintainer of it, and do all the packaging inDebian. Doing
> > it in that way, web2py will be in theDebianarchive and,
> > automatically, in all its derivatives, as Ubuntu.
>
> > If you need any help, I can lend you a hand, or even do the
> > maintaining of web2py together, but for that, I need more time to know
> > the insides of web2py before feeling I can do a good work with it.
>
> > Regards.
> > José L.- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht niet weergeven -
>
> - Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -
