Re: request review: blogc
Greg Troxel <[email protected]> Sat, 04 Jul 2026 08:01:59 -0400
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.netbsd.devel.packages |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Todd MARTIN <[email protected]> writes: >> It looks very good; pkglint shows only one issue, the lack of COMMIT_MSG >> (that could be used to add it to pkgsrc with "cvs commit -F COMMIT_MSG". > > Added this file in. Was a little confused initially because I don=E2=80= =99t > have really experience working with CVS and using git with pkgsrc-wip, > but I was able to find example in other packages in pkgsrc-wip to get > an idea of what I need to do here. We don't really document this, but commit messages for new packages also include (at least part of) DESCR; I just stuck that in. > I adjusted the description, hopefully that helps a little more. So > give some context, blogc is pretty much a static site generator, I > used the =E2=80=9Cblog compiler=E2=80=9D terminology as that is what upst= ream uses. I > also don=E2=80=99t have a problem switching the language to just say. A s= tatic > site generator. Thanks; I also tweaked COMMENT to give people the hint that this is a single-page tool, not a full site generator like hugo. (Yes, I know people can use make/etc. to build multiple pages. It's still different.) I realized that the tests use bash. IMHO that's an upstream bug unless there's a really good reason POSIX shell couldn't be made to work. It's also an upstream bug not to be documented. Plus it uses diff and tee. I added a USE_TOOLS line for these. I've imported it to www/blogc and removed the wip directory. If you're feeling double-plus diligent, you might file upstream bugs: - README says "blog compiler" but the program is a blog entry compiler. The point is that the word blog refers to a whole site or sub-site with multiple pages and navigation among them, not a single page. And, blog is perhaps overly specific, if this can compile web pages that aren't really blog pages. - README doesn't document that c99 is required. - README doesn't document how to run tests. - README doesn't document tests dependencies. - Tests need bash (should use POSIX shell as /bin/sh instead ). - Tests are apparently run with "set -x" and are thus overly verbose. None of these are super serious, but they'll help the next packager on $OTHER_OS.