ashinn / snow-fort Goto Github PK

Packages declare dependencies on scheme libraries, not on other repository packages. However, packages are allowed to have multiple versions. This begs a question about reproducability; if some package depends on package foo, it's unguaranteed that it will keep on working when new version of package foo gets released (I assume resolution is plainly to use latest version)

The "Authors" column went a little haywire when I uploaded packages using both the --authors and --maintainers options. The package.scm file looks okay, so I think this is just a bug in the conversion to HTML.

Update date for packages in snow-fort.org seems to be lag bebind one month.

I've created two PRs for a few obvious UI improvements, but I have some ideas for more controversial stuff:

• I only found out that the package listing is sortable by checking the site source. Maybe styling should be changed to display both sorting arrows by default?
• Dunno about you, but I keep clicking the links in the package column and keep getting surprised they prompt me for a download instead of taking me to a detailed package metadata view. I'd rather only have the name there and a dedicated download/source column with the download link there, similar to the documentation.
• The name could lead to a detailed package metadata view. It would contain a prettier version of the information in http://snow-fort.org/pkg/repo. I'm not sure what exactly to include there, besides everything from the list view, but in a row instead of column-oriented form. Candidates:
  • License information
  • Dependencies (with links to dependencies provided by the repo?)
  • Signatures (could be useful for verification)
  • Package size
  • Lesser common fields

Let me know if any of these are worth hacking on.