Scenario: I want to make installing my repository that is dependent on another of my repositories easier. I want to make the installation easier by doing it "in my way" (with a shell script) rather than package installers, which allows command-line installation of repositories, at the cost of development speed.
Wouldn't the idea be installing the repository with a particular version that corresponds to the version of the repository dependent on it? For example, an inductive algorithm finder of version 1.0 requires an interpreter of version 0.5. I saw the versions page somewhere while checking on the traffic to my GitHub repository.
I read on a well-known repository that SemVer is a preferred system of organising versions in the x.y.z format.
Is my repository ready for the industrial exposure of availability on the command-line? Is it just me, or did I add too many unnecessary, bug ridden features meaning I am grateful I kept an old version as a separate repository (some may have kept it as a separate version) and I can transfer the best (working) features from the new to the stable version... Why is my stable release my first of my three generations of my program - will it be too simple for be available on a command line argument?
Do I get credit for these uses of my software - I always wondered if people would use my programs when I had an Apple IIe, and was very steadfast about putting my name and the date in the documentation of the program. What if I make a famous program, does that make me famous?
Do I need a copywriter for my documentation page, you know that one that someone seems to copy onto various websites? Different in what way? Whatever happens, I don't want to be that person who wrote too much or too little documentation - "where is it?"
I could think of more to write - who (with which OS's, etc.) needs my program, do I need a single set of instructions on a page for using my dependency of repositories - with training, walkthroughs, even videos?
So, would using a package installer allow a user to search through a description of my repository and my algorithm given greater awareness? Should I label it "what I got up to" and "what I want, or rather how it fits into the eco-system of my other repositories"?
I just wish SWI-Prolog had a verify (input) feature, or should I put it in myself? Maybe I should explain how users should format input into my algorithm.
Photo by Bob Smith from FreeImages
Oldest comments (0)