Re: Is url2pkg used interactively?

[Roland Illig <roland.illig%gmx.de@localhost>]

Am 04.10.2019 um 01:45 schrieb Brook Milligan:
>
>> On Oct 3, 2019, at 12:56 PM, Jonathan Perkin <jperkin%joyent.com@localhost> wrote:
>>
>> * On 2019-10-03 at 19:46 BST, Roland Illig wrote:
>>
>>> Any other wishes for url2pkg? I recently improved the dependency
>>> detection for Perl and Python modules and automatically extract the
>>> license if it's declared unambiguously. Do you know anything else that
>>> can and should be automated?
>
> I have been using it recently for GitHub stuff and it often has thought they were python packages for some reason, and so got it all wrong.  I think this is the most consistent place for errors in my experience.

Yep, that's fixed.

> I also often use the interactive editing stage to update a few things, but would be happy either way.  If there is a (for example) -e option to control it, I might disable it especially if it was smarter about filling in details after extracting the package.

My main question is whether the interactive editing has to happen before
the distfile is fetched.

I'd like to move that to the very end of url2pkg, at which point it may
even become useless.

> I will also note that in the (near?) future TeXlive will be versioning packages and so it should be possible to handle them similarly to others.  We already have texlive2pkg, but perhaps its functionality could be integrated with url2pkg.  I haven't looked into either one, though, so this may well make no sense.

texlive2pkg looks similar to what I've done in url2pkg recently (the
license check, and adjusting a few package variables), so it should well
be possible to integrate it.

One thing that is missing from url2pkg right now is the update mode. It
looks doable though.