Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Reference for packages available in other package managers (Arch, Brew, and so on) #22

Open
daviddias opened this issue Jan 1, 2016 · 10 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
6 participants
@dignifiedquire

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Jan 20, 2016

Any ideas, thoughts on how we want to pursue this? (homebrew is out of date most of the time) Do we maintain those ourselves, etc

@jbenet

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Jan 20, 2016

We don't yet maintain those releases. but eventually we should. I would like to have some guidelines before we take that on, for example:

  • code signing (beginning to get setup for this)
  • package name should include ipfs (eg go-ipfs or ipfs-node, or ipfs-update or ipfs-fs-repo-migrations. that way we avoid polluting the pkg mgr's namespace
  • publish new updates in a timely manner (within a few days).
  • maybe publish on pkg mgrs some time (a day or two) after releasing, so that any bugs may be tested in the close community + fixed before being shipped out to pkg mgr end users
  • standard description/readme guidelines (wording, links to ipfs, links to repos, etc)
  • whether to prefer our own channels (apt ppa's, brew taps, etc) or use the main one
  • enlist a single "packager" master for each of the package managers, as the point-person to review + resolve issues.
  • make sure available package managers listed on dist.ipfs.io entry for the package
  • make sure process is as automated as possible
  • make sure 3+ people have rights to do it

any more ideas?

@dignifiedquire

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Jan 20, 2016

Sounds good, from experience I think it's also important to make sure this process is as automated as possible and that at least 3 people know how and have rights to do it.

@dignifiedquire

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Jan 20, 2016

One other note, when we have things setup with package managers we should make this prominent in the dist page, as this makes it much easier for users to keep up to date.

@jbenet

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Jan 20, 2016

thanks updated list above

@mitar

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Mar 24, 2016

Just a suggestion, don't name the package go-ipfs, but ipfs-go or something.

@ChrisChinchilla

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Dec 4, 2018

@dignifiedquire etc… I have no experience of the other platform packages, but the Homebrew one has always worked for me and is up to date, and regularly updated. I'm more of a tech writer, so from a docs perspective I'd suggest adding a mention that packages are available, but they aren't officially maintained, community supported etc.

I'd be happy to add that to docs, but would like to know it's welcome before doing so. :)

@solarimix

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented May 27, 2019

is the homebrew ipfs formulae still valid on Apple OSX X84_64, Mountain Lion 10.5.8 running TigerBrew?

@solarimix

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented May 27, 2019

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.