[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ITL release process
- To: Development Discussions <developer at arabeyes dot org>
- Subject: Re: ITL release process
- From: Nadim Shaikli <shaikli at yahoo dot com>
- Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 00:17:11 -0800 (PST)
- Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=HvWY0eVJRrVxLFIoLbKEsmlWYfF0wQbvW5NIfebsFom3CGdp4sQ+bc94PWAMLQWfBA6s20dsG70tpArumxBDsYToRJbeJFgIt0V6GAOVom/v6mD4GvLC5yMiQm3aA2td46pGDQJRIBRqd1dtm683C3JmcyEv4Hm2t8rQhiEz1x8= ;
--- Samy Al Bahra <samy at kerneled dot org> wrote:
> The ITL release process is far from perfect and far from satisfactory.
> During the creation of the FreeBSD port for libitl, several things were
> noted.
>
> 1) When the distribution file is uncompressed, it must uncompress to
> libitl-${VERSION} and not itl-libs.
My bad - it currently uncompresses to itl/lib-$(VERSION). I'll take
care of this for next releases.
> 2) When announced, libitl should be announced as a seperate package than
> itools.
That is already the case.
> 3) The library naming scheme is incorrect. libitl-${VERSION}.so is not a
> standard naming convention and will create conistency issues with
> many systems for future ITL software.
Agreed. The '-$(VERSION)' should not be there. I'll leave this for Thamer.
Salam.
- Nadim
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com