Re: Guile project page garbage collection

[Neil Jerram]

address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

> Hi,
>
> Neil Jerram <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> One immediate worry: for the projects that are up to date, I am
>> concerned that we would be asking the authors to jump through a new
>> set of hoops, when they've already jumped nicely through the hoops
>> that we specified before.
>
> OTOH, it's been a while since somebody submitted something, I think, so
> maybe it's probably not unreasonable to expect authors to be re-submit a
> thing; or they could just say "keep the previous entry for my project".
>
>> Can we not do something using the existing format (assuming that the
>> records in that format are available somewhere), so as not to require
>> resubmission of equivalent information?
>
> You mean the s-exp-based format?  I don't know whether the information
> was kept in this format somewhere and actually, I don't know what tools
> are available to deal with it.  I think we could work with raw HTML,
> given that entries are fairly simple.

Yes.  I had a quick look for the saved project submissions.  I thought
they might be somewhere in Savannah CVS, or else in one of ttn's
websites.  But I couldn't find them.

The tools for dealing with this format are available, though; see
http://gnuvola.org/software/guile-projects/.

But in any case, if they contain equivalent information, I guess one
protocol (HTML) is as good as another (sexp).

Do you have something in mind for implementing an automatic
build/sanity check, or are you implying that project maintainers
should confirm that their projects still build with 1.6/1.8 before
resubmitting their entries?

Regards,
        Neil