[PD-dev] overview of upstream sources?

[Roman Haefeli]

On Thu, 2015-12-17 at 19:20 +0100, Fred Jan Kraan wrote:

> >
> > I would rather propose adding some mandatory meta information to deken
> > uploads. A package that can be downloaded from puredata.info should at
> > least contain the information which sources it was built from.
> 
> The puredata.info could host such a list in the public wiki.
> 
> It is not very convenient to download several packages just to find out 
> the most recent/bug free.

Exactly. This is why there is a version field in deken packages.

I don't see how something like a fork map helps the end user, i. e. the
one using Pure Data and installing an external through deken. When you
install something with deken, you primarily want to know what sources
have been used to build that package. Once you know that, you might also
want to know where those sources are forked from. Currently, you only
know _who_ as uploaded a package, but you do not know _where_ the
sources of a package are hosted. 

I'm not opposing the idea of a fork map, but there is more important
information missing before that.

Roman
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/attachments/20151222/0e18f35a/attachment.sig>