Dear all,
Last week, DavidG asked me what we should be sure to discuss about CVS.
Most things can probably best wait until CVS-week, but there's some
things which might be best handled at the programmers' meeting. This
is partly because I don't yet know if Steve is going to have to be at
the CVS-week -- David is going to discuss that next week.
Here, then, is a collection of queries and to-dos, which I'd like to
talk over with folk:
Probably at the programmers' meeting:
- I'll give a summary of where we're at with this, for the benefit of
those who haven't been experimenting already, and/or who aren't coming
to the CVS-week. I'll also make sure I can again produce paper
documentation by then.
- The tagging and releasing procedures that I mentioned on the wiki
page, and that Mark and I discussed in outline on the list a couple of
weeks ago. This _has_ to have Steve's input, I think.
- Installation locations: In the stardev thread `[CVS] AST and
general starconf issues', starting 4 April, we talked over whether
Starlink applications and libraries should be installed in the
`standard' places -- all libraries in lib/, all platform-neutral files
like help files in share/, and so on. We didn't come to any
conclusions. Again, this needs Steve's input.
Things which can be probably best discussed during the CVS-week:
- `Codeline ownership' and CVS notification. At present, we have a
rough idea that, for example, DavidB has the last word on AST. Would
it be useful to note this down, for the sake of those cases where it's
less obvious -- the component.xml file was intended to be able to help
with this sort of thing. Similarly, it would be easy to set up a
system where <developer> elements had an attribute which indicated that
the individual in question would like to get commit messages. I expect
that to be quite useful -- does anyone else?
- AST build/link issues. Including whether we still need the ban on
-L/star/lib (or equivalent) in here.
- A CVS `show state' script would be nifty. Any ideas what it should
have in it, given that I don't just whistle one up between now and
then?
- Building documentation. Currently done by default. Should it be?
- Is the mechanism for rolling distribution tarballs, as represented
by the AST distribution, adequate?
Anything else? Is that a reasonable division?
See you,
Norman
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Norman Gray
http://www.astro.gla.ac.uk/users/norman/
Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, UK
[log in to unmask]
|