Devtopics - hvoigt/msys2 GitHub Wiki
Here are some topics and milestones that deserve more discussion or work. This page should serve as an overview of our long-term issues and goals and be a place to write down the decisions and open questions so that they don't get buried in IRC logs or mailing list archives. Each goal should be described in appropriate detail and should be broken up into smaller tasks for interested members to tackle the goal step by step.
Unify public relations, solidify hosting
People are sometimes (often?) confused about where to get information about the project. It would be great if all the user-facing parts were on msys2.org and all the developer-facing parts on GitHub. Back-ends can be wherever (mailing lists and big file storage would be examples of things that we can't do with GitHub).
We currently have:
- GitHub org for our main repositories
- a secondary GitHub org for contributions upstream and as a working place
- GitHub repos for source and issue tracking, msys2-runtime, msys2-pacman, msys2-keyring, msys2-packages, mingw-w64-packages, path_convert
- [https://sourceforge.net/p/msys2/](SourceForge project) for mailing lists, forums, and as a secondary mirror
- http://msys2.github.io with installation and donation instructions with source on GitHub
- http://msys2.org, our own domain (owned by Pepsi?), with a CMS that is currently unused (hosted by Diablo-D3)
- http://repo.msys2.org as the primary mirror (hosted by Diablo-D3)
What to do:
- migrate tickets from SF to GH; close them on SF afterwards
- migrate forums and discussion from SF to GH; disable them on SF afterwards
- move active MSYS2-related repositories on GH to the msys2 org, including issues (Alexpux/..., maybe Elieux/msys2-launcher and other contributed tools)
- transfer msys2.org domain ownership
- maybe find more (fast and reliable) mirrors so we can ditch SF file hosting
- try moving the mailing list including archives from SF, see mbox export; can we use Sourceware? can we have our own (some say that mailman on our own server would be spam-filtered badly)? notify list members of the change (possibly set up a redirect for some time)
- change links in packages ("submit bug" URLs) and elsewhere
Off-load package building and uploading
Currently, Alexey is responsible for building and uploading packages (both new and updated ones). Approving packages for inclusion is done by him and sometimes Ray. We need to delegate the burden of building packages to more people so that Alexey has time for other stuff and updates are not put on hold in times of his unavailability.
A buildbot would be the best solution, but it may take a long time to get one. Ray, Renato, Qian, and other people have tried to use AppVeyor for building MSYS2 packages, with varying results. It currently isn't completely feasible for us due to their time limits on individual builds (GCC and Qt are the biggest offenders here).
We're currently testing buildbot integrations with both AppVeyor and a customized Drone CI with MSYS2 on Wine on Linux from Qian on https://www.tea-ci.org . Both should be triggered on pull requests, merges and pushes to mingw-packages and msys2-packages. There's a separate IRC channel for messages from the Drone buildbot (#msys2-ci on OFTC).
What to do:
- write down packaging rules (rules inherited from ArchLinux, rules about
pkgbase
,pkgname
,description
, FHS, 32+64 bits, ...) - prepare automated checks to prevent mistakes (one idea: compare package file list between latest and new version of the package)
- agree on a way to maintain a list of packages to build (a script that compares package files with PKGBUILDs?)
- agree on a way to make sure the repository is updated by at most one person at a time
- designate packagers and sign packager keys if necessary
- get a buildbot that can build all packages
- make the buildbot automatically upload packages
- also work towards reproducible builds (https://reproducible-builds.org/)
Additional discussions:
Official release
MSYS2 is currently marketed as a potentially unstable developer tool and it's not yet advertised in any way to end users. People are sometimes confusing (in their minds, or in their words, or both) it with Msys, much like MinGW-w64 is confused with MinGW.org. The naming clash of MSYS2 the distribution vs. msys2 the emulation layer is also unfortunate (again reminiscent of the MinGW-w64 projects vs. its distributions).
What to do:
- decide if there's a need for a different name for the whole thing; if yes, decide upon one
- split release Qt runtime from debug Qt runtime and Qt developer files
- make core updates fool-proof
- approve and polish one graphical front-end to pacman
- create and/or polish packages for most popular open-source software (browsers, video players, email clients, office suites, IDEs, web servers) and maybe some additional useful software (like password managers, games, image editors, )
Merge with Cygwin
The MSYS2 runtime is forked from Cygwin and the code bases are irregularly (but often) synchronized. There has been some talk about modifying Cygwin to make it pluggable so that the MSYS2 runtime can be reduced to a plugin DLL that will make all the desired behavior changes.
There has been a lot of requests for additional POSIX-only software in MSYS2 (X, various daemons...) and the response was always "MSYS2 is not for you; use Cygwin". It would be nice if people could just install one POSIX emulation layer and have everything available from there.
What to do:
- write down every difference between Cygwin and MSYS2 runtimes
- offer appropriate patches to Cygwin as configurable behavior (e.g. CYGWIN=winsymlinks:copy)
- design an interface prototype for unacceptable features; figure out if the idea is sound
- design and implement the plug-in interface in cooperation with Cygwin
- re-implement MSYS2 runtime as a Cygwin plugin
- figure out if we can use Cygwin package repositories or if MSYS2 repositories can be used from Cygwin
Links:
- https://github.com/Alexpux/Cygwin/commit/4f756d6cc28179319ceccce01dd698de3f22c212
- https://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/mailman/mingw-w64-public/thread/[email protected]/
- http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/2014-12/msg00084.html
- https://github.com/Alexpux/MSYS2-packages/issues/83
Stick to upstream releases of core packages
This topic relates to the three above (package building, official release, cygwin merge).
The msys2-runtime and pacman packages are currently built from our git repositories (alexpux/cygwin, alexpux/msys2-pacman) and their recipes in msys2-packages only specify a handful of additional patches. This goes against the standard set by other recipes and a it should be considered that the patches are moved to msys2-packages and the base sources are fetched from upstream instead.
Another change to consider is to start building only release versions of the core packages. Although MSYS2 is a rolling release distro, there seems to be little need to use less tested, potentially more buggy code directly from git. If there's a really important, not yet realeased patch, we can download it into msys2-packages until the next release.
What to do:
- discuss
- implement
Get more people
The MSYS2 team is pretty small and we could use more people.
What to help with:
- prepare and maintain packages
- respond to people reporting issues, fix bugs in packages
- upstream patches
- write documentation
What to do to get them:
- ?
bin/foo
vs bin/foo.exe
Fix pacman errors wrt. conflicts in The runtime emulates extension-less executables by also looking for .exe
on various FS calls. (There are more of these hacks, for example for symlink emulation.) This is causing pacman to complain when two packages independently provide both foo
and foo.exe
, or even worse dir/
and dir.exe
. People have to either disregard these conflicts with --force
or (re-)install packages in a specific order.
A possible solution to these conflicts would be to disable the .exe interpolation, but then something would break, as users wouldn't be able to either run MSYS2 executables directly from Windows, or couldn't use the short extension-less names of commands in MSYS2. Therefore there also has to be a change that will mitigate that. We can for example design a pass for makepkg
that will make sure every executable going into {,/usr}/{bin,lib,libexec}
will have its extension stripped and then another pass that will build a simple .exe (or .cmd?) wrapper for it. (This way, we can even make all non-binaries directly executable from Windows.)
What to help with:
- think/discuss if this is a good idea
Provide more mingw-w64 versions of common CLI tools
It would be nice to allow people to have as complete as possible GNU-like environment without having to fall back to msys2 bash and the likes. The roadblock in this is that by putting every possible tool into /mingw{32,64}/bin
will inevitably screw up native (i.e. non-cross) builds. Ideas for solutions:
- for every tool that's known to cause problems inside of MSYS2, include shell scripts in
/mingw{32,64}/bin
that take priority over the.exe
s. - separate the essential build tools from everything else; (by using symlinks, aliases, or just using the package manager) we could have gcc, binutils and friends in
/mingw{32,64}/bin
and everything else for instance in/mingw{32,64}/morebin
so that a MSYS2/MINGW shell only uses thebin
, but people can opt in for usingmorebin
outside of MSYS2
What to help with:
- design, test, agree on, and implement a way to prevent problems when building
- port all the tools!
Links: