On Thu, Oct 09, 2008 at 09:09:44AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:

On Thu, 2008-10-09 at 10:28 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Insist that we use fedorahosted.org or other project hosting websites
whenever we are upstream for a project? It certainly makes it easier for
others to consume our bits when they don't have to crawl through source
rpm packages. SRPM dumps are a horrible way to manage upstream source
code anyway.


Only if we allow source repo tags to be a suitable source distribution
method. Since fedorahosted still doesn't have an easy to use way of
distributing tarballs, and getting the code via a scm checkout is quite
easy, it should suffice.


On a tangential note, I'd _love_ it if specfiles started growing
metadata pointing back to upstream scm repos and development fora. This
is important to me because I have set myself a personal goal to make it
as easy as I can to go from OLPC's builds to patches delivered to
upstream developers; hence anything I can do which removes steps like
'find the upstream SCM' or 'find the upstream mailing list' from that
workflow is a Good Thing in my book.

Michael

P.S. - I'd definitely appreciate it if folks who are more knowledgable
about Fedora and RPM could suggest ways that I might pursue this goal
within the larger Fedora/RPM community.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Thu October 9 2008, Michael Stone wrote:

> On a tangential note, I'd _love_ it if specfiles started growing
> metadata pointing back to upstream scm repos and development fora. This

> P.S. - I'd definitely appreciate it if folks who are more knowledgable
> about Fedora and RPM could suggest ways that I might pursue this goal
> within the larger Fedora/RPM community.

Why do you want it in the specfile? Imho it would fit better within the
packagedb. There it should be also easier to add it, given that packagedb
upstream accepts patches for this.

Regards,
Till
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

2008/10/9 Till Maas <opensource@till.name>:
> On Thu October 9 2008, Michael Stone wrote:
>
>> On a tangential note, I'd _love_ it if specfiles started growing
>> metadata pointing back to upstream scm repos and development fora. This
>
>> P.S. - I'd definitely appreciate it if folks who are more knowledgable
>> about Fedora and RPM could suggest ways that I might pursue this goal
>> within the larger Fedora/RPM community.
>
> Why do you want it in the specfile? Imho it would fit better within the
> packagedb. There it should be also easier to add it, given that packagedb
> upstream accepts patches for this.

Actually, it'd be even better if this was in the RPM headers and would
show up in a "rpm -qi".

--
Jeff Ollie

"You know, I used to think it was awful that life was so unfair. Then
I thought, wouldn't it be much worse if life were fair, and all the
terrible things that happen to us come because we actually deserve
them? So, now I take great comfort in the general hostility and
unfairness of the universe."

-- Marcus to Franklin in Babylon 5: "A Late Delivery from Avalon"

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Thu, Oct 09, 2008 at 10:03:34PM +0200, Till Maas wrote:

On Thu October 9 2008, Michael Stone wrote:


On a tangential note, I'd _love_ it if specfiles started growing
metadata pointing back to upstream scm repos and development fora. This



P.S. - I'd definitely appreciate it if folks who are more knowledgable
about Fedora and RPM could suggest ways that I might pursue this goal
within the larger Fedora/RPM community.


Why do you want it in the specfile? Imho it would fit better within the
packagedb. There it should be also easier to add it, given that packagedb
upstream accepts patches for this.


I suggested spec-files because I'm somewhat familiar with them, because
they don't have downtime, because they're included in SRPMs which I have
to preserve no matter what, and because I have to deal with a small
number of packages which are not yet available in Fedora (or which are
forked).

Does storing the information in packagedb have some compelling benefit
that compensates for dealing with these hassles by other means?

Thanks,

Michael

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Thu, 2008-10-09 at 19:55 -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> Does storing the information in packagedb have some compelling benefit
> that compensates for dealing with these hassles by other means?

It means that you don't have to muck through rpm's code in order to add
a tag that will cause older/other versions of rpm to puke.

--
Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams <ivazqueznet@gmail.com>

PLEASE don't CC me; I'm already subscribed
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 04:46 -0400, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-10-09 at 19:55 -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> > Does storing the information in packagedb have some compelling benefit
> > that compensates for dealing with these hassles by other means?
>
> It means that you don't have to muck through rpm's code in order to add
> a tag that will cause older/other versions of rpm to puke.

Adding tags actually doesn't make older versions of rpm puke, it just
ignores them

Jeremy

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Friday 10 October 2008, Jeremy Katz wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 04:46 -0400, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote:
> > On Thu, 2008-10-09 at 19:55 -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> > > Does storing the information in packagedb have some compelling benefit
> > > that compensates for dealing with these hassles by other means?
> >
> > It means that you don't have to muck through rpm's code in order to add
> > a tag that will cause older/other versions of rpm to puke.
>
> Adding tags actually doesn't make older versions of rpm puke, it just
> ignores them

rpmbuild on the other hand is pickier than that.

$ echo "Foo: bar" > foo.spec
$ rpmbuild -bb foo.spec
error: line 1: Unknown tag: Foo: bar

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list