[Slackbuilds-users] website direction requests

Robby Workman rworkman at slackbuilds.org
Mon Jul 3 00:43:54 UTC 2006

Erik Hanson wrote:
> A drop-down that defaults to 11.0 might not be bad, there's no
> real reason to flat-out reject scripts for 10.2, they just need
> to be marked as such. Also, scripts could rely on -current (or 
> future versions) post-11.0.

I think that introduces an unnecessary management headache for 
us; as it stands, everything is geared toward 11.0 and forward, 
with an FAQ entry providing instructions for use on older 
versions of Slackware.  Again, as a general rule (and with the 
exception of gcc flags), there's nothing in a SlackBuild script 
that's inherently dependent upon Slackware version, so I just 
don't see the need for explicitly declaring a version.  The 
assumption should be that all scripts work on the most recent 
version of Slackware, and if the assumption is false, then a bug 
report should be made.

>> ...will we need to generate the tar.gz archive manually?
> The back-end of the admin bit should be able to handle this,
> creating/updating the .tar.gz's when a script is approved or
> updated.

Okay, that's sounds reasonable to me - in other words, as part of 
the approval process, the admin should also create a tar.gz of 
the directory, right?  Where will that file be stored, though - 
in the same directory, or in a separate directory somewhere?

>> The only other issue I see at the moment is:  when the category 
>> directories become more populated, are the files still going to 
>> list in a single column, or will they spread out to two (or more) 
>> columns?
> Layout shouldn't be an issue after it starts pulling the data from a
> db instead of the filesystem. This needs to happen anyway, for search
> capabilities.

I'm not really sure how the layout becomes a non-issue when the 
data is being pulled from the database instead, but I'll trust 
you on that point... :-)




More information about the Slackbuilds-users mailing list