Having the same contents on gnu.org and sf.net (was: File names)

[Peter Simons]

Guido Draheim writes:

 >> Wouldn't it be beneficial if Guido's archive would
 >> generate its presentation from the _same_ CVS repository
 >> as gnu.org does?

 > (a) killing the duplication would be nice but my systems
 >     works by making a cvs snapshot with rpmbuild -ta *.tar.
 >     How to get the gnu macros into the snapshot tar
 >     then...

I am sorry, but I don't understand the problem. Why is this
difficult?


 > (b) There are macros in the sfnet branch that are purely
 >     experimental, I was not aware of how the gnu archive
 >     does mark experimentals anyway.

I don't mind having experimental macros at gnu.org at all!
How do you mark them at sf.net? I'll just support the same
syntax here, and then you can commit them into the CVS
repository unmodified. Okay?


 > (c) I am submitting macros to savannah already, those
 > experimentals can go there when the processing is going
 > to be defined to an acceptable degree.

Like I said above: Please don't hesitate to add the
experimental macros to the gnu.org CVS repository. I'll
adapt my software to cope with your markup, that's no
problem.


 > We are currently in the making of archive unification, if
 > the gnu ac-archive build files are in place I can start
 > dropping the sfnet build and sync processing - in that
 > order.

Well, my primary concern is that both sf.net and gnu.org
should build from the same repository of _macros_, because
everything else is asking for inconsistencies which will
confuse the user. If we could get that solved right now, it
would be great!

If we could get the macros that only sf.net has right now
added into the gnu.org CVS repository, it would be a great
step forward IMHO.

Peter