From 1be510f9529cb082f802408b472a77d074b394c0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nicolas Vigier Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:46:12 +0000 Subject: Add zarb MLs html archives --- zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101228/001926.html | 118 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 118 insertions(+) create mode 100644 zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101228/001926.html (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101228/001926.html') diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101228/001926.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101228/001926.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..4849194c6 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101228/001926.html @@ -0,0 +1,118 @@ + + + + [Mageia-dev] maintainers database + + + + + + + + + +

[Mageia-dev] maintainers database

+ Samuel Verschelde + stormi at laposte.net +
+ Tue Dec 28 14:37:30 CET 2010 +

+
+ +
Le mardi 21 décembre 2010 10:34:00, andre999 a écrit :
+> Luca Berra a écrit :
+> > On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 11:06:36PM +0100, Romain d'Alverny wrote:
+> >> For instance:
+> >> * instead of having a single maintainer for a given package, have
+> >> several maintainers (with an admin maybe) over a given package (easy);
+> > 
+> > yes please
+> > 
+> >> * should there be groups of packages defined? (this adds/replicates
+> >> some logic that may already be somewhere else)
+> > 
+> > this can be useful, many desktop environments consist of more than one
+> > core package and development/packaging should be coordinated, so it
+> > makes sense.
+> > 
+> >> * should there be explicity groups of maintainers? or implicit (as
+> >> made of people maintaining the same package)?
+> > 
+> > i think explicit
+> > 
+> > L.
+> 
+> We could have a structure something like this :
+> 
+> Primary key : name of package
+> 
+> Other fields, 1:1 relation :
+> - package rpm category (+ subcategory, if any)
+> - repository
+> - etc
+> 
+> Other fields, 1:N relation :
+> - Packager nickname + packager status (primary maintainer, trainee or
+> whatever) + real name + email
+> (The last 2 items could be in a separate table keyed by nickname.)
+> 
+> - Package dependancies (names of other packages)
+> - Package provides (names of other packages)
+> - etc.
+> 
+> Any of above fields could be chosen as secondary keys.
+> 
+> This is just a quick suggestion, for the purposes of discussion.
+> 
+> It doesn't seem that this sort of info would be useful in
+>   mageia-app-db, which is primarily for end-users.
+> 
+
+Well, there's no information related to RPMs that wouldn't be useful in 
+mageia-app-db, which is meant to be useful both for end-users and contributors 
+(basic view for the former, advanced view for the later). Dependancies, 
+provides, will be queried from Sophie2.
+
+Maintainers will have to be queried from the maintainer db too so that we can 
+add this information on mageia-app-db.
+
+In fact, hadn't been the deadline so short, I would have stepped in for the 
+maintainer db, which would have benefited from the work already done on mageia-
+app-db.
+
+Regards
+
+Samuel Verschelde
+
+ + + +
+

+ +
+More information about the Mageia-dev +mailing list
+ -- cgit v1.2.1