[GRASS-dev] osgeo4w package for GRASS 7

[Martin Landa]

Hi,

2015-02-21 16:27 GMT+01:00 Vaclav Petras <wenzeslaus at gmail.com>:

> I don't like grass71-dev and 7.1.svn (or 7.1svn) because we are branching
> 7.1 from 7.0, not from trunk, right? So, trunk will never become 7.1 (nor
> 7.2, ...).

hm, VERSION file in trunk says 7.1. I live in impression that relbr70
is just for releasing 7.0.x versions (see the name of the branch).
Later we will create branch relbr71 from trunk and trunk becomes 7.3
and so.

> However, I don't like grass-trunk-dev (for trunk) and grass-dev (for 70
> branch). Doesn't trunk says the same as dev? Most of the projects has
> developement code in trunk (or master branch in case of Git). Just few have
> special dev/devel/development branch. grass-dev to me sounds like trunk.
> Isn't 70 branch in fact stable rather than development?

yes, we chose package name for daily builds based on QGIS package
`qgis-dev`. I found only two projects in OSGeo4W with daily builds  -
GRASS GIS and QGIS. In my eyes, -dev postfix is wrong in this meaning,
so I would agree with you. Since there are no naming rules for OSGeo4W
we could choose eg.:

grass70-dev -> grass-daily or grass-svn
grass71-dev -> grass-trunk-daily or grass-trunk-svn

(btw, grass-dev is eg. used in Debian for packaging development files
(headers, and so on)

> I quite like grass6-dev for release branch 64 (and for following branches),
> grass7-dev for 70 release branch (and following) and grass-dev for trunk
> (forever). What is confusing about that is that "-dev" packages on
> Debian/Ubuntu (elsewhere?) are for development files (e.g. if you want to
> build upon the library) and development versions are solved using different

Right.

> Anyway, the complete proposal would be:
>
>  * grass6 (latest 6.x release, now 6.4.4)
>  * grass7 (latest 7.x release, now 7.0.0)
>  * grass6-dev (release_branch_6* branches)
>  * grass7-dev (release_branch_7* branches)
>  * grass-dev (trunk)
>
> Package grass could be synonym for grass6 for compatibility reasons or it
> can be synonym for grass7 because this is what is the default and preferred
> version of GRASS GIS. Alternatively, grass7 can be just grass which seems a

I am not sure if it's really needed to create such metapackage. The
simple solution would be enough I would say:

grass (version 7.0.0)
grass6 (version 6.4.4)

> Later, I might have some alternative suggestion with -daily -nightly -stable
> -release -devel -trunk but I have to think about it more.

See above. Martin

-- 
Martin Landa
http://geo.fsv.cvut.cz/gwiki/Landa
http://gismentors.cz/mentors/landa