[mod-geocache] RE: Re: [El] RPM package for mod_geocache

[thomas bonfort]

On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 09:09, Peter Hopfgartner
<peter.hopfgartner at r3-gis.com> wrote:
> --------Mathieu Baudier <mbaudier at argeo.org> wrote--------
> Subject: Re: [El] RPM package for mod_geocache
> Date: 28.10.2010 18:39
>
>>Hi Peter,
>>
>
> Salut, Mathieu
>
>>I'm currently working on building/deploying your packages through the
>>"official" elgis factory.
>>TinyOWS went smoothly (i haven't deployed it, because I do the
>>signing/release in batch)
>>
>>But for mod_geocache, do you know which SVN revision you took?
>>Or should I take the latest?
>
> The package was done with release r27, current seems to be r37.
>
>>Shouldn't we ask Thomas (the developer) to do a release, since he made
>>an announcement on the osgeo-discuss mailing-list?

Hi,
As you stated, I'm not quite ready to do a release as there are still
some core functionalitites I want to add. Target release date for 0.1
would be around the very beginning of 2011. On a related note, I'd be
more than happy to pass on official rpm building of the project onto
you if you would like/want to contribute that.

best regards,
thomas

>
> I've added the mod-geocache ML to CC.
>>
>>As already discussed, I think we should (try to) push upstream
>>projects to do releases, even if just RCs, or milestones, so that
>>users and developers can speak the same language.
>>
> Generally speaking, I agree wholeheartly. But since the project is very young, Thomas may prefer to still do major changes in the structure of mod-geocache before freezing for a release.
>>Anyhow, I have no issue with taking SVN revisions in testing, but I
>>would like to use the one you are testing.
> A numbering scheme for subversion checkouts could be to add the revision number as a last digit, let's say mod-geocache-0.0.0.27. This way releases numbers could increase monotonically with time.
> Anyway, I would not add software, which does not have an official release to stable.
> Should we have a kind of experimental repo, where proof of concepts, etc. can be placed, such as the mod-geocache package? Too much overhead?
>>
>>- either we say that the revision IS the version: mod_geocache-0037
>>(but later updates may be a pain when they start versioning properly)
>>- or we already have an idea of which versioning scheme he plans to
>>use, and we use the revision to qualify it: mod_geocache-0.0.1-r37
>>
>>Comments/ideas welcome!
>>
>>Mathieu
>>
>
> Regards,
>
> Peter
>
>>On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 10:59, Peter Hopfgartner
>><peter.hopfgartner at r3-gis.com> wrote:
>>> I've assembled an preliminary RPM package for mod_geocache:
>>>
>>> For the time being they will be available at:
>>>
>>> http://www.r3-gis.com/upload/mod_geocache-0.0.1-1.el5.src.rpm
>>> http://www.r3-gis.com/upload/mod_geocache-0.0.1-1.el5.x86_64.rpm
>>>
>>http://www.r3-gis.com/upload/mod_geocache-debuginfo-0.0.1-1.el5.x86_64.rpm
>>>
>>> Do not use them for production:
>>>  * this is my first Apache module packaging, ever
>>>  * Packaging is less then alpha, anyways
>>>  * and the code is taken from the subversion repo.
>>>
>>> Feedback welcomed!
>>>
>>> Have fun,
>>>
>>> Peter Hopfgartner
>>>
>>> R3 GIS Srl - GmbH
>>> http://www.r3-gis.com
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> el mailing list
>>> el at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/el
>>>
>>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mod-geocache" group.
> To post to this group, send email to mod-geocache at googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mod-geocache+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mod-geocache?hl=en.
>
>