W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qa-dev@w3.org > December 2002

[check] Progress on 0.6.2...

From: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 06:34:48 +0100
To: QA Dev <public-qa-dev@w3.org>
cc: Frederic Schutz <schutz@mathgen.ch>
Message-ID: <a01060007-1022-9A2CC29A09A511D7B76600039300CF5C@[]>

[ CCed to Frederic Schutz, see below ]

Since W3C-folk/Olivier has acted on the "burning" issue from 0.6.1, we may
no longer be that much in need of a 0.6.1 release from a v.w3.org
perspective. But there are still some open issues that could do with an
update and there are packaging issues that would make a 0.6.2 release
appropriate IMO.

First off, IMO we should invite Frederic Schutz <schutz@mathgen.ch> who is
doing the Debian packages to join the QA-Dev list. I don't know how much
interest he has in the details of the Validator development and other
QA-Dev topics, but it's cumbersome to do the packaging discussions in
off-list email.

Second, based on feedback from Frederic and Ville the plan for the
postulated 0.6.2 release is as follows:

1. Change /source/ to start off with a blurb about the latest version
   always being available from http://v.w.org/source/.

2. Make the rest of the page refer _specifically_ to the current release
   (c.f. the new CVS practice which makes HEAD unsuitable).

3. Create a non-versioned /download/ directory on v.w3.org where RPMs
   and possibly .debs can live. This directory should not have a static
   index to avoid linkrot, and apart from symlinks to latest should have
   versioned file names.

4. Figure out how to get packages from the packagers and into this
   directory (an upload CGI, HTTP PUT, W3Cer to do the legwork, etc.)

5. More...? What else does Frederic/Ville need to facilitate packaging
   and distribution of official packages? cf. apt-get etc.

When it comes to packaging I have, apart from general good quality, only
one specific concern; namely that I want packages that are not in a
vendor's standard distribution to be hosted somewhere at w3.org (probably
v.w3.org). This mainly to make clear that the packages are "official"[0]
and to make them easy to find for users. This does not, of course, prevent
the packagers from viewing the v.w3.org copies as a secondary location
and/or mirror of their own preferred placements. :-)

Only if this doesn't inconvenience the packagers unduly, of course.

Want to chime in on this Ville, Frederic[1]?

[0] - The "officialness" is actually also for the benefit of the users
      so they won't have to worry about whether these are actually
      supported packages or some hack put together in 5 minutes by an
      unrelated party.

[1] - Your message will end up in a moderation queue since you're not
      subscribed yet, Frederic. But the moderator can manually let any
      replies through, it just takes a little while.

"A plague o' both your houses! I am sped." - Mercutio, kinsman to the Prince.
                   See Project Gutenberg <URL:http://promo.net/pg/> for more.
Received on Saturday, 7 December 2002 00:35:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:36:23 UTC