This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Subversion package maintainer
- From: "Max Bowsher" <maxb at ukf dot net>
- To: "Dave Slusher" <mailinglist at moribund dot ath dot cx>,<cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2003 18:19:43 +0100
- Subject: Re: Subversion package maintainer
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>
Dave Slusher wrote:
> OK, I'm going to bundle all replies in one mail rather than several little
>>> This is a client only build."
>> I haven't actually *tested* it, but svnserve seems to build fine.
> Well, that begs a question. My original intention was to tackle only the
> client, and then later on if it seemed like a thing to do and was needed,
> the server. Does it make sense to have two seperate packages for client
> server, have only one package and roll support in for the server whenever,
> bite the bullet and wait to offer a package until I have both parts in it?
Given that my svnserve.exe is 25kB, I think it makes sense to just have a
I've just done some test checkins and checkouts via the svnserve daemon, and
everything seems to work fine.
Re "waiting for both parts" - I didn't have to do anything complicated to
build the server. It just built as part of the normal build process.
>>> category: Devel
>>> requires: cygwin apache expat
>> Why the dependency on apache?
>> What do you plan to do about neon, apr and apr-util ?
> I really don't know. I took a first stab at this from the subversion docs,
> I'm not 100% sure. I tried to follow the "how to become a package
> checklist as close to the letter as I could, which says ask if there is an
> existing maintainer and propose a setup.hint in the initial message. I
> done a lot of the gut work on this yet, since I didn't want to put a lot
> resource in if someone was already doing it. I can send a revised one
> in a day or two, after I have actually tried to assemble a package and
> for sure what dependencies exist.
OK, well I can tell you for sure about the dependencies:
expat, db4.1: Already have Cygwin packages.
neon, apr, apr-util: No Cygwin packages.
I was wondering how you intended to package neon, apr and apr-util.
> The one thing that seems for certain is that y'all are right and I don't
> apache as a package dependency. I think it might be a build dependency,
> not a runtime one.
No, not even a build dependency.