Mailing List Archive: Re: Old patches under src/5.0/patches

Re: Old patches under src/5.0/patches

Tim.Bunce at ig

Dec 11, 1995, 4:59 PM

Post #1 of 10 (461 views)

With regard to CPAN:

> From: Jarkko Hietaniemi <jhi@snakemail.hut.fi>
>
> Tim Bunce writes:
> > The src/5.0/patches tree looks badly in need of a clear out.
> >
> > Tim.
>
> Please be more specific. Do you want a "rm -rf" for the whole thing?
> If not, what?

The src/README refers to dist and patches directories that don't exist
in that directory. It also does not mention latest.tar.gz file.

In src/5.0 I think the naming style for perl5a12h.tar.gz and
perl5b3h.tar.gz is confusing in relation to perl5.001m.tar.gz etc.
I'd suggest perl5.000a12h.tar.gz and perl5.002b3h.tar.gz.
That would also make the files sort correctly.

In src/5.0/patches/perl5-porters the perl5alpha and perl5beta directories
are confusingly named in relation to the 5.000 and 5.001 directories
and people talking about 'the beta'. I'd suggest renaming them to
5.000alpha and 5.000beta. That would also make them sort correctly

Perhaps 5.0/patches/perl5-porters/5.000* directories could be deleted now.
CPAN needs a policy on posterity. CC'd to perl5-porters for comment.

A src/5.0/patches/perl5-porters/5.002beta directory is needed, or
at least a README pointing to the id/ANDYD directory. As it stands,
current perl5-porters patches are not appearing in the expected
place: src/5.0/patches/perl5-porters/...

Tim.

Re: Old patches under src/5.0/patches [ In reply to ]

jhi at snakemail

Dec 12, 1995, 3:29 AM

Post #2 of 10 (459 views)

Tim Bunce suggested:
Tim> With regard to CPAN:
Tim> The src/README refers to dist and patches directories that don't exist
Tim> in that directory. It also does not mention latest.tar.gz file.

And I implemented.

Tim> In src/5.0 I think the naming style for perl5a12h.tar.gz and
Tim> perl5b3h.tar.gz is confusing in relation to perl5.001m.tar.gz etc.
Tim> I'd suggest perl5.000a12h.tar.gz and perl5.002b3h.tar.gz.
Tim> That would also make the files sort correctly.

Ditto.

Tim> In src/5.0/patches/perl5-porters the perl5alpha and perl5beta directories
Tim> are confusingly named in relation to the 5.000 and 5.001 directories
Tim> and people talking about 'the beta'. I'd suggest renaming them to
Tim> 5.000alpha and 5.000beta. That would also make them sort correctly

Likewise.

Tim> Perhaps 5.0/patches/perl5-porters/5.000* directories could be deleted now.
Tim> CPAN needs a policy on posterity. CC'd to perl5-porters for comment.

Not yet done, more opinions welcome. Personally I'd like to save some
relics.

Tim> A src/5.0/patches/perl5-porters/5.002beta directory is needed, or
Tim> at least a README pointing to the id/ANDYD directory. As it stands,
Tim> current perl5-porters patches are not appearing in the expected
Tim> place: src/5.0/patches/perl5-porters/...

For the time being the src/5.0/patches/perl5-porters/5.002beta points
directly (a symlink) to id/ANDYD.

++jhi;

Re: Old patches under src/5.0/patches [ In reply to ]

Dec 12, 1995, 6:33 AM

Post #3 of 10 (456 views)

Strange sunspot activity caused Tim Bunce <Tim.Bunce@ig.co.uk> to write:
| In src/5.0 I think the naming style for perl5a12h.tar.gz and
| perl5b3h.tar.gz is confusing in relation to perl5.001m.tar.gz etc.
| I'd suggest perl5.000a12h.tar.gz and perl5.002b3h.tar.gz.
| That would also make the files sort correctly.
|
| In src/5.0/patches/perl5-porters the perl5alpha and perl5beta directories
| are confusingly named in relation to the 5.000 and 5.001 directories
| and people talking about 'the beta'. I'd suggest renaming them to
| 5.000alpha and 5.000beta. That would also make them sort correctly
|
| Perhaps 5.0/patches/perl5-porters/5.000* directories could be deleted now.
| CPAN needs a policy on posterity. CC'd to perl5-porters for comment.

Yes, since we don't keep old 5.001[x] versions, why are we still keeping
old alpha and beta releases that are now close to two years out of date?

-spp

Re: Old patches under src/5.0/patches [ In reply to ]

Dec 12, 1995, 6:33 AM

Post #4 of 10 (458 views)

Strange sunspot activity caused Tim Bunce <Tim.Bunce@ig.co.uk> to write:
| In src/5.0 I think the naming style for perl5a12h.tar.gz and
| perl5b3h.tar.gz is confusing in relation to perl5.001m.tar.gz etc.
| I'd suggest perl5.000a12h.tar.gz and perl5.002b3h.tar.gz.
| That would also make the files sort correctly.
|
| In src/5.0/patches/perl5-porters the perl5alpha and perl5beta directories
| are confusingly named in relation to the 5.000 and 5.001 directories
| and people talking about 'the beta'. I'd suggest renaming them to
| 5.000alpha and 5.000beta. That would also make them sort correctly
|
| Perhaps 5.0/patches/perl5-porters/5.000* directories could be deleted now.
| CPAN needs a policy on posterity. CC'd to perl5-porters for comment.

Yes, since we don't keep old 5.001[x] versions, why are we still keeping
old alpha and beta releases that are now close to two years out of date?

-spp

Re: Old patches under src/5.0/patches [ In reply to ]

Tim.Bunce at ig

Dec 12, 1995, 7:41 AM

Post #5 of 10 (459 views)

> From: Stephen Potter <spp@psa.pencom.com>
>
> Strange sunspot activity caused Tim Bunce <Tim.Bunce@ig.co.uk> to write:
> |
> | Perhaps 5.0/patches/perl5-porters/5.000* directories could be deleted now.
> | CPAN needs a policy on posterity. CC'd to perl5-porters for comment.
>
> Yes, since we don't keep old 5.001[x] versions, why are we still keeping
> old alpha and beta releases that are now close to two years out of date?

There's a part of me which feels sad at the loss of an easy to access
record of our collective efforts over the years. It is an amazing
testament to the viability of this kind of distributed development.
And the sheer volume of work is quite stunning.

Then again, we know what we've achieved and it's doubtful that any
software archiologists will dig up the patches in years to come as a
record of some strange civilisation known as perl5-porters.

Tim.

Re: Old patches under src/5.0/patches [ In reply to ]

Tim.Bunce at ig

Dec 12, 1995, 7:41 AM

Post #6 of 10 (457 views)

> From: Stephen Potter <spp@psa.pencom.com>
>
> Strange sunspot activity caused Tim Bunce <Tim.Bunce@ig.co.uk> to write:
> |
> | Perhaps 5.0/patches/perl5-porters/5.000* directories could be deleted now.
> | CPAN needs a policy on posterity. CC'd to perl5-porters for comment.
>
> Yes, since we don't keep old 5.001[x] versions, why are we still keeping
> old alpha and beta releases that are now close to two years out of date?

There's a part of me which feels sad at the loss of an easy to access
record of our collective efforts over the years. It is an amazing
testament to the viability of this kind of distributed development.
And the sheer volume of work is quite stunning.

Then again, we know what we've achieved and it's doubtful that any
software archiologists will dig up the patches in years to come as a
record of some strange civilisation known as perl5-porters.

Tim.

Re: Old patches under src/5.0/patches [ In reply to ]

Dec 12, 1995, 8:57 AM

Post #7 of 10 (458 views)

Strange sunspot activity caused Tim Bunce <Tim.Bunce@ig.co.uk> to write:
| There's a part of me which feels sad at the loss of an easy to access
| record of our collective efforts over the years. It is an amazing
| testament to the viability of this kind of distributed development.
| And the sheer volume of work is quite stunning.
|
| Then again, we know what we've achieved and it's doubtful that any
| software archiologists will dig up the patches in years to come as a
| record of some strange civilisation known as perl5-porters.

I've got plenty of CDs that people made with all this on it. It is no
longer useful material, it is archive fodder. ;-)

-spp

Re: Old patches under src/5.0/patches [ In reply to ]

jhi at snakemail

Dec 12, 1995, 10:56 AM

Post #8 of 10 (458 views)

So I'll apply rm -f to all pre-5.001? Sniff.

++jhi;

Re: Old patches under src/5.0/patches [ In reply to ]

Dec 12, 1995, 11:07 AM

Post #9 of 10 (457 views)

Strange sunspot activity caused Jarkko Hietaniemi <jhi@snakemail.hut.fi> to wri
te:
| So I'll apply rm -f to all pre-5.001? Sniff.

Not on *my* authority. ;-)

I don't see a need for it to be kept as part of the FTP distribution. It's
just confusing to everyone. Feel free to copy it somewhere and save it,
but it's just wasting bandwidth on the CPAN.

-spp

Re: Old patches under src/5.0/patches [ In reply to ]

jhi at snakemail

Dec 12, 1995, 11:49 AM

Post #10 of 10 (456 views)

> I don't see a need for it to be kept as part of the FTP distribution. It's
> just confusing to everyone. Feel free to copy it somewhere and save it,

ftp://ftp.funet.fi/pub/languages/perl/archaeology? :-)

> but it's just wasting bandwidth on the CPAN.

That's true. On *my* authority, the olden days just vanished from CPAN.
they are still preserved but not on CPAN.

++jhi;