On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 18:36, Dave <diendien@gmail.com> wrote:

I would like to create a new package for lightning, which is the calendar extension for Thunderbird. I currently manage lightning-nightly for 32-bit systems, but for 64-bit systems (which I'm using now), I have to build the extension from source. This process initially downloads a lot of files, so if I created a package for this, it would take an hour to download and build a 1.2MB extension. Thus, I was going to build the extension on my computer and upload the XPIs to a server. However, I'm not sure what I should name the package and keep track of the versions.

The process is: use mercurial to clone the comm-central code, then run a python script which will update the source with cvs. After that, I can run make to build the lightning extension, upload it to a server, and then allow anyone to download it. To update, I need only to run the python script and rebuil

Any suggestions on how the package should be named? Maybe -hg or -src? I'm also not sure which package version to use (since I may only update the XPI itself once a week/month).

Because building from source is still the "proper" way to do things, and using user-generated binaries requires a certain level of trust on the part of the user if they understand what how it works: I would create a package that builds from source and name it 'lightning-nightly', one that uses 32-bit binaries called 'lightning-nightly-bin32', and one that uses your 64-bit binaries called 'lightning-nightly-bin64'. You'd probably need to have a 'lightning-nightly' build-from-source PKGBUILD on your computer anyways to automate building your 64-bit binaries, so it isn't much extra effort. Then, put a notice in the 'lightning-nightly' that build takes a very long time and they may want to use a -bin package, and a notice in the -bin64 one that they're using binaries created by a user (the paranoid types like me will appreciate this info being handed out ^^). -- Ranguvar [Devin Cofer]