[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lmi] Regression: spin control position in dataview

From: Vadim Zeitlin
Subject: Re: [lmi] Regression: spin control position in dataview
Date: Thu, 18 May 2017 23:33:23 +0200

On Thu, 18 May 2017 21:18:21 +0000 Greg Chicares <address@hidden> wrote:

GC> When an official release like 3.1.1 is declared, is it equivalent to some
GC> sha1sum at the wx github site, so that the following URLs yield archives
GC> with the same contents?
GC>   https://github.com/wxWidgets/wxWidgets/archive/$(SHA1SUM_for_3.1.1).zip

 Ideally yes, although we still haven't found the best way of handling
SHA-1 sums in the files included in the release, so we actually prepare the
downloadable files (the ones under releases/download) first, then compute
their sums, then update the files in the source tree (the ones included in
the archives generated by GitHub) and tag. So there is actually a small
difference between them, but it's not significant.

 Maybe more importantly, the downloadable files are not exactly the same as
the source tree archive anyhow. E.g. they include the compiled message
catalogs with the translations and also rename various setup0.h files in
the source tree to setup.h. But AFAICS none of this affects lmi even so.

GC> Or is it the case that github has only the master branch, and official
GC> releases correspond to some release branch not represented at github?

 No, GitHub has all branches and whichever branch (master or  WX_3_0_BRANCH
currently) the releases are done from, the corresponding sources are still
available from it.

GC> The reason I ask is that lmi's 'install_wx.make' has two alternative code
GC> paths for URLs of the two types given above, and I'm wondering if there is
GC> any value in retaining both ways.

 As I wrote above, I don't see any advantages in using the official release
from lmi point of view. But OTOH they are more "stable", i.e. even if
wxWidgets moves again to some other service, we would presumably still
continue to provide these files, just at different URLs.

 I also can't totally exclude that one day in the bright future we will get
rid of all generated files in the source tree, even I have to admit that it
looks unlikely as I wanted to do it since an eternity or longer and we
still have them in Git. But if we do this, then it would affect lmi, as it
would mean that GitHub archives wouldn't contain "configure" any longer. Of
course, you'd just have to rerun "autoreconf" to recreate it, so it's not a
fatal problem neither but, still, using a release tarball would be slightly
advantageous then.

GC> Oh, and, BTW, do both hypothetical 3.1.1 URLs above include all supported
GC> architectures, like the old wxALL tarballs--so that they provide all the
GC> source needed for msw, gtk, and so on?

 Yes, we stopped bothering with providing separate platform-specific
downloads a long time ago, the only benefit of having them was to cut down
on the files size, but nobody cares about an extra dozen of megabytes or so

GC> [At any rate, I guess no file like this will be created:
GC>   ftp://ftp.wxwidgets.org/pub/3.1.1/wxWidgets-3.1.1.tar.bz2 [see below]
GC> Coming from the age of steam, I have a predisposition to think sites like
GC> github come and go, while ftp is eternal. However, this page
GC>   http://wxwidgets.org/downloads/
GC> demonstrates a preference for github; and wx's own ftp site, as well as
GC> the York University mirror, seem frozen in 2014.]

 I don't necessarily sympathize with your vision of FTP (which is one of
the worst protocols I know), but in any case it's not like we had any
choice in this matter: FTP site was never very popular compared to the
other locations (SourceForge first, then GitHub) but it still consumed
quite some resources, so maintaining it was problematic and it had to be


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]