Hallo, Hans-Christoph Steiner hat gesagt: // Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On Saturday, Mar 20, 2004, at 21:47 America/New_York, Frank Barknecht
I'd like to announce another idea I had tonight while out clubbing (forgive me, if it doesn't make sense because of this...)
I wonder, if an "installer" branch would make sense. In this branch, the package maintainers could make changes that ease packaging, like for example unifying variables in Makefiles and so on. Later this could be merged to upstream.
Good idea?
You think about installers while clubbing? ;) Anyway, I don't think its really necessary to have a separate branch. The installer-specific files are in their own directories and usually, the changes that I need to make when making the installers are generally helpful, ie making things easier to build, etc.
Actually I was thinking about packaging at home, when doing an extended Debian rules file and I found, that the flext-externals use inconsistent namings. Sometimes FLEXTPATH should point to the toplevel flext directory, sometimes if should point to flext/source, sometimes to flext/pd-linux (or similar). The idea to fix this with branching came while clubbing (loud music sometimes helps with thiso ;)
If FLEXTPATH was consistent, then the rules-file (which basically is a Makefile) could just set FLEXTPATH once and for all, but this would need changes inside the respective external directories.
ciao