[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[oc] Re: Inquiry
On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 12:08:56PM -0400, Charles Lepple wrote:
> Rather than try to become part of Debian, I think that making use of
> their QA software would be a more reasonable goal. As Andreas mentioned,
> packaging the cores in Debian wouldn't be a very good logical fit, but
> a lot of Debian's methods are applicable to OpenCores. That would also
> ensure that people looking for OpenCores-specific bugs wouldn't get lost
> among all of the non-core-related areas of Debian.
There isn't much QA software except for lintian - which checks already
built packages for Debian policy compliance. It's obviously no use
elsewhere.
The autobuilders aren't part of QA but of porting. Of course some bugs
get unearthed there (such as "doesn't build from source") but that is
more a side effect. Package uploads happen in at least source plus any
number of binary architectures. Usually only one binary, i386
architecture, accompanies the source and the autobuilders then build it
for the other 10 architectures.
That all isn't very useful for cores. Debian provides compiled software
for installation, OC provides source code only. The only thing that
could be very useful to have is a public bug tracker. Debbugs is there,
which is mainly mail operated.
A more complete solution would be to switch from the home grown project
scripts on opencores.org to something like GForge (a fork of the
Sourceforge code) which includes bug tracking among other features.
This saves development and bug fixing work on the web page.
Or more radically, move the OC projects to savannah.gnu.org (let them
create an open cores sub tree) and save even the project pages
administration.
--
Andreas Bombe <bombe@informatik.tu-muenchen.de> DSA key 0x04880A44
--
To unsubscribe from cores mailing list please visit http://www.opencores.org/mailinglists.shtml