[mira_talk] Re: Stable download URLs on sourceforge
- From: Bastien Chevreux <bach@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: mira_talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 11 May 2014 22:21:45 +0200
On 09 May 2014, at 12:12 , Peter Cock <p.j.a.cock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I appreciate you are trying to make it clear to new-comers which
> is the current stable and development release (although SF tries
> to help with their "Looking for the latest version?" link).
Yeah, and even that doesn’t really work as too many people seem to visit SF on
Windows, get the source package as download link and then try to compile
themselves under Linux *sigh* I’m considering making the Linux binary package a
default for Windows downloads, too.
> However, the fact that you move past stable releases from "stable"
> to "older releases" is frustrating for automation/reproducibility and
> external documentation - the URLs break :(
> […]
> Can you think of another way of doing this which avoids moving
> things and breaking URLs? e.g. using "v4" for all the stable MIRA
> v4.x releases.
What I do not want is a directory with hundreds of downloads, more or less
unsorted. Also, I’d like to save SF some resources by not having binary
packages of outdated versions sitting around for ages … SF is a free resource
and one should be careful not to overuse it.
Then again I see the pain it causes for automated downloads.
I’ve looked around SF and there is, I think, no ideal solution to this dilemma:
1. One way could be to go via
"http://sourceforge.net/projects/mira-assembler/files/latest/download” By
setting a fake browser ID string with curl/wget one even gets redirected to the
binary version “wanted”. Would that be a possibility for the Galaxy install
wrapper? I’m keeping these “links” updated.
2. I could try to create vie the SF shell interface softlinks which would point
from something like “current/linux-bin.tar.bz2” to the current version.
However, I’m not completely sure this is doable … and whether I would always
remeber to do that.
3. I switch to a directory structure many other projects use: “something/4.0”,
"something/4.0.1", “something/3.9.5” etc.pp. The downloads in these
subdirectories would have stable URLs. However, here too I would, after some
time, delete some older binary packages. Especially if some severe bug is
present in those versions which has been fixed in later revisions.
Any comment regarding what would be preferable?
B.
--
You have received this mail because you are subscribed to the mira_talk mailing
list. For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe, please visit
http://www.chevreux.org/mira_mailinglists.html
Other related posts:
