1.6.0 sometime late next week

[Randall Wood]

On 24 Nov 2007, at 04:43, Ryan Schmidt wrote:

> On Nov 22, 2007, at 20:35, Juan Manuel Palacios wrote:
>
>> On Nov 22, 2007, at 9:37 PM, Randall Wood wrote:
>>
>>>> 	Another thing I forgot to say: I don't currently have a Panther  
>>>> machine I can use, so I don't see it as likely that I'll be  
>>>> building a dmg for OS (and, for that matter, I don't have a  
>>>> Tiger one at the moment either, but I'm more than sure that'll  
>>>> be much simpler to come by).
>>>>
>>>> 	So if anyone has a Panther box, has an interest for a dmg for  
>>>> that platform and feels like lending a hand, please do  
>>>> coordinate with me to put together that dmg. Chris, you still  
>>>> have your Panther box?
>>>>
>>>> 	If we don't come by one I'll simply remove mention of it from  
>>>> the new website and will tell stragglers that we simply don't  
>>>> have the resources to produce it.
>>>
>>> Is there any reason not to simply state that Panther users need  
>>> to download the 1.5.2 disk image and install from that and ensure  
>>> that selfupdate is run (if it isn't already run during the  
>>> install from the disk image)?
>>
>> 	That's certainly an alternative, sure. If we don't get anyone to  
>> produce a Panther dmg for 1.6.0 we could definitely go that way.  
>> Thanks for the suggestion.
>
> Let's produce a Panther disk image. I can scare up a Panther  
> machine if necessary.
>
> Randall, I assume you meant the 1.5.0 disk image, since we don't  
> have disk images for minor versions, only major versions.
>
>>> Also is there any reason not to use our sourceforge site as the  
>>> download source?
>>
>> 	Sorry, didn't remember we had a presence there ;-) How would we  
>> go about using it? We would still get our release products up on  
>> our own site & repository, but if we can also leverage the  
>> sourceforge distribution engine, then by all means! Can you please  
>> coordinate that?
>
> I didn't know we had a presence on SourceForge. They have lots of  
> services: downloads, issue tracker, mailing lists, web site. Should  
> we start using those as well? I would say no. We already have an  
> issue tracker, mailing lists, and web site through Mac OS Forge,  
> and we have thus far hosted downloads there as well. Let's continue  
> to host downloads and everything else with Mac OS Forge as well. If  
> Mac OS Forge's download system is insufficient, we should bring  
> that up with Mac OS Forge management, not jump ship to SourceForge.  
> I think we shouldn't be using SourceForge for anything. Not that I  
> have anything against them at all. We just already have  
> alternatives. Let's keep everything in one place.


The only really possibly useful service for us that SourceForge (SF)  
has is that massive geographically dispersed mirrored download service.

We snagged a SF site (http://sf.net/projects/macports) because a  
simple search brought up some macports* sites at SF, and so that  
someone could not pull a darwinports.com on us, we have it now.  
http://macports.sourceforge.net redirects to http://www.macports.org

 From personal experience, SF's tracker is difficult to use, their  
mailing list service is identical to macosforge's. I have tickets to  
allow us to point users back to our own services, but doubt I'll get  
a positive response back soon. If a MacPorts Foundation ever stands  
up, we could leverage some other related SF services in that regard,  
but doubt we'll need to.


Randall Wood
rhwood at mac.com
http://shyramblings.blogspot.com

"The rules are simple: The ball is round. The game lasts 90 minutes.  
All the
rest is just philosophy."