openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: dmake
Date Wed, 14 Sep 2016 22:40:36 GMT

> On Sep 14, 2016, at 5:28 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pescetti@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> Tarballs are at:
>> 	https://github.com/jimjag/dmake/releases
>> My goal was to try to combine all the flavors of dmake into one
>> "canonical" version we can use.
> 
> Is there a reason for that?
> 

The only reason I saw was that it was a dependency that we
haven't tracked at all (see the req to fix configure.am/in
with the correct URL) and was/is easy to lose. There seemed
to have been some improvements since 4.12 that also looked
like they might have been useful.

All in all, have a tarball w/ no real source version
control, and a tarball whose location has changed and
been lost, up to now, seems like an easy thing to
resolve. Hence the repo.

> 
> Our build is designed to succeed based only on resources under control of the project,
namely: the SVN repository; the OOoExtras site; the Extensions site. Depending on yet another
online resource (a personal account on GitHub) seems an additional issue.
> 

epm is required and not under our control. In fact, epm 4.3 is out
and work much better for AOO since it removes the need for the
long-since deprecated PackageMaker app and instead uses the
official pkgbuild stuff. Part of my configure.in changes (to
be submitted to trunk) notices that.

Or is this the typical warm and inviting behavior that all
"new" AOO contributors are subjected to?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org


Mime
View raw message