8000 Think about packaging · Issue #11 · umccr/copyrite · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Skip to content

Think about packaging #11

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.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionall 8000 y send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Open
andrewpatto opened this issue Oct 21, 2024 · 6 comments
Open

Think about packaging #11

andrewpatto opened this issue Oct 21, 2024 · 6 comments
Assignees
@brainstorm

Comments

@andrewpatto
Copy link
Member

Were this to become a popular/useful utility - how does it get published/available in distros? Brew etc?

I presume we can start with a brew tap immediately and host it via the repo?
@andrewpatto
Copy link
Member Author

I think listing in distros is much more long term.. got to find out if it is useful and people want it first..

@andrewpatto
Copy link
Member Author

https://docs.brew.sh/How-to-Create-and-Maintain-a-Tap

@andrewpatto
Copy link
Member Author

Just because it is in the same area as the CI builds - and again thinking in the short term about not putting it into public registries.

But I believe that we can add "taps" to our Brew (basically point it at github.com/umccr somehow?) and there is some config magic that would allow us to install it on our own macs?

Can you investigate what that needs? Possibly needs a special UMCCR brew repo?

@brainstorm
Copy link
Member
brainstorm commented Mar 21, 2025 •
edited
Loading

The "canonical" way to publish Rust binaries and libraries (crates) is via https://crates.io ... sure, we can brew tap it relatively easily (I've done it before for other packages), but it's unusual (impractical? unintuitive?) to not use cargo for a tool like this one? Caveat: For now and IMHO!

Building packages for distros is quite a "level-up" for when a package becomes mainstream... and requires a significant effort to put it through (and maintain it) via the different channels/builders for Debian/Ubuntu/Fedora, etc...

@andrewpatto
Copy link
Member Author

Yes understand distros is way down the track - and we would need to demonstrate adoption and usefulness.

And crates is the correct way once we have worked out stuff - like what the binary should be called.

Though - why would there be an expectation that people who want to use a rust binary are into Rust? i.e. they may not even know what cargo is. Surely there is a market for people who just want to run a CLI tool?

@brainstorm
Copy link
Member
brainstorm commented Mar 21, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Yup yup, very valid points, I'll take this as a template once we retake this, I think it's fairly well written and recent:

https://skerritt.blog/packaging-your-rust-code/

https://optimizedbyotto.com/post/debian-packaging-from-git/

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@brainstorm brainstorm

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@brainstorm @andrewpatto
0