Re: release.sh - I cannot do it.
Ben Collins <bcollins@debian.org> writes:
> On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 03:05:14AM -0800, Karl M. Hegbloom wrote:
> > Revert it, fix it, do what you will with it. I'm not for this.
> > `release.sh' is a crock.
>
> Are you saying you broke it and are leaving it for some one else to mess
> with?
Personally I'm going to revert it in my working copy. I told Karl to
commit his changes last night because I didn't think they were going
to be drastic like this.
Now, I've gotten halfway towards adding the support for his new scheme
in release.sh to the Makefile, rescue.sh, and other scripts (because
it's far-reaching enough that it touches basically all the scripts
that build disk images), but I have no guarantees that the release.sh
scheme is even going to work at all, and I fear that I'll break other
architectures in the process.
<rant>
Karl: release.sh may be a crock, but it *WORKED*. And we had
just *barely* gotten it working when you pulled it out from underneath
us again.
We have a release to make. People DO NOT CARE whether our
boot-floppies build system is a model of elegance and efficiency.
People DO CARE that we have already held up the potato release for
several months because of similar drastic changes to boot-floppies
that took much longer to settle in than we'd expected.
Yesterday morning, I built a set of boot-floppies for Alpha that
*worked*, and worked *well*. I was about to rsync them to va and
announce them on debian-alpha, but then I heard that we were going to
change the directory layout slightly. I did *not* expect that I'd
have to rewrite chunks of the Makefile and several support scripts to
do something as simple as changing images-1.44/<subarch> to
<subarch>/images-1.44.
There's a time for redesign, and a time to patch up holes with chewing
gum and duct tape. I humbly submit that we are currently in the
latter period.
</rant>
--
David Huggins-Daines, Senior Linux Consultant, Linuxcare, Inc.
613.562.1239 tel
dhuggins@linuxcare.com, http://www.linuxcare.com/
Linuxcare. Support for the revolution.
Reply to: