iB::Topic::How can we improve our .dsl extension files?

	Damn Small Linux :: Damn Small Linux Board The DSL Forums

» Welcome Guest
[ Log In :: Register ]

Damn Small Linux Board » MyDSL Extensions » myDSL Extensions (deprecated) » How can we improve our .dsl extension files?

		Mini-ITX Boards Sale, Fanless BareBones Mini-ITX, Bootable 1G DSL USBs, 533MHz Fanless PC <-- SALE $200 each!
		Get The Official Damn Small Linux Book. DSL Market , Great VPS hosting provided by Tektonic

Pages: (5) </ 1 2 3 4 [5] >/

[ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ]

Topic: How can we improve our .dsl extension files?, Discussion on .dsl extension building.

< Next Oldest | Next Newest >

nucpc

Group: Members
Posts: 89
Joined: Dec. 2003

Posted: June 29 2004,11:40

Not overly sure which one of the two current thread this should best be posted
in..... but I'll put it here (as response has been requested).

On the untested .dsl front I agree with many of the views expressed so far,
particularly those concerning broken .dsl's appearing in the repository, which
should be avoided at all cost. I do understand that I come from the luxurious
position of having some available personal webspace though.....

I attempt to do what I can for other users and I would hope that people who make
.dsl's can manage, by cooperating with others, to post, test and finalize a
package before it is included in the repository. Pre-filtering via the forum I think
is the only way forward. So advertise you .dsl, if folk are interested (which is an
important requirement) let that be known and anybody who can, try and help out.

On the other subject under discussion, .lsm's, I'm very very uncomfortable. I feel
that at best they're a necessary evil but we're still verging close to `claiming' work
that isn't ours. All I do is repackage other people's hard work and any effort involved
in that is pretty trivial by comparison. So a minimum use of these things would
please me.

All the best.

roberts

Group: Members
Posts: 4983
Joined: Oct. 2003

Posted: June 29 2004,16:50

Quote

On the other subject under discussion, .lsm's, I'm very very uncomfortable. I feel that at best they're a necessary evil but we're still verging close to `claiming' work that isn't ours. All I do is repackage other people's hard work and any effort involved in that is pretty trivial by comparison. So a minimum use of these things would please me.

I couldn't agree more with you nucpc!

That is why I have been relucant to partake in posting them. That is why I posted "my curve fitting" use of them.

I still have major issues. The fields author, version, title, desc, license, I believe belong to the original software author/vendor.

I am even uncomfortable with the maintained-by field. I don't maintain openoffice, php, pyhton, etc., etc.

If these are going through ibiblio.org are they then subject to the search engine at ibiblio.org. http://www.ibiblio.org/linsearch. Talk about "stepping on toes!" That would mean anyone would possible find these. ibiblio hosts many many projects. Even more of a reason that I don't want to seemingly take credit where it does not belong!

And looking in the repository, how can I tell the difference between ayttm.dsl and ayttm2.dsl, as there is no field which indicated what has been changed, added, deleted!

cbagger01

Group: Members
Posts: 4264
Joined: Oct. 2003

Posted: June 29 2004,17:33

All of your points are valid concerns.

Unfortunately, the "mirror" system does not seem to be taylored for our needs with regards to testing packages.

It seems like we have a few options:

(1) Try uploading files to ibiblio and deal with the screwed up lsm / upload issues.

(2) Create a short script to semi-automate the lsm creation process. If people use the script to generate their lsm files, the odds of a screwed up lsm file are much lower. If we really wanted to make it foolproof, the script would even do the ftp upload for you and send the files to the correct location.

(3) Someone with a few hundred megs of web space graciously donates it for use as a testbed for DSL extensions. This person also figures out a way to allow users to upload their files in a managable way.

Option (1) sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. Others or myself can help out with option (2) although it would be a few days before I can get around to it. Also it will require a test cycle before it is published for general use. Option (3) would be the best solution, but it requires a volunteer to make such a committment come true.

nucpc

Group: Members
Posts: 89
Joined: Dec. 2003

Posted: June 29 2004,18:34

I can't promise anything but I will try to have a look at something along the lines of
`Option 3'........it'll take a couple of days for the softening up process on my System's
Manager to take effect but I'll get back to you as soon as I can.

All the best.

John

Group: Super Administrators
Posts: 697
Joined: Sep. 2003

Posted: June 30 2004,00:23

Alright, no lsm files! We'll come up with another standard.

We are also working on a system which will have more flexibility than using the Ibiblio anonymous ftp, stay tuned.

24 replies since June 10 2004,03:13

< Next Oldest | Next Newest >

[ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ]

Pages: (5) </ 1 2 3 4 [5] >/

Damn Small Linux Board » MyDSL Extensions » myDSL Extensions (deprecated) » How can we improve our .dsl extension files?