FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 08-31-2011, 05:42 AM
Vít Ondruch
 
Default Oh god, my eyes (packaging a hairball of bundled PHP stuff, tt-rss)

Speaking about prototype and scriptaculous, I am sure that they are
bundled also in Rails and if there are some Rails applications packaged,
they will be included also in them. However I am not sure if they should
be packaged separately or just copylibs.

Vit



Dne 31.8.2011 06:35, Adam Williamson napsal(a):
> Hey, all. So, I'm looking at packaging tt-rss - an RSS reader
> implemented as a PHP webapp - for Fedora, since I run it on my own
> server. It became rapidly clear that it's a landmine of bundled PHP
> libraries and snippets and uncertain licensing. I'm unsure which of the
> things it bundles would be likely to qualify as copylibs, and also a few
> of the things it bundles seem to raise wider questions, so I thought I'd
> post my 'deps list' here and raise some of the issues:
>
> * dojo/dijit - F/OSS, packaged
>
> * simplepie - F/OSS, packaged
>
> * CheckBoxTree.js - requires formal license, unpackaged -
> http://www.thejekels.com/blog/dojo/dijit-tree-with-multi-state-checkboxes/comment-page-1/#comment-46 . not entirely sure whether this would count as a copylib.
>
> * htmlpurifier - F/OSS, unpackaged but its PEAR channel is packaged as
> php-channel-htmlpurifier, review at
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542045
>
> * iui - F/OSS, unpackaged - https://code.google.com/p/iui/
>
> * MiniTemplator - F/OSS, unpackaged -
> http://www.source-code.biz/MiniTemplator/
>
> * phpmailer - F/OSS, packaged
>
> * position.js - comprises http://codesnippets.joyent.com/posts/show/835
> and http://codesnippets.joyent.com/posts/show/836 - unlicensed, author
> contacted - these are probably copylibs?
>
> * prototypejs - F/OSS, unpackaged, already embedded in many other
> packages - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523277
>
> * php-pubsubhubbub - F/OSS, unpackaged:
> https://code.google.com/p/pubsubhubbub/ (was
> https://code.google.com/p/pubsubhubbub-php/ , merged into upstream)
>
> * scriptaculous - F/OSS, mostly unpackaged, but part of
> http://pypi.python.org/pypi/Scriptaculous , which is a python wrapper
> with old versions of scriptaculous and prototype embedded in it
>
> * sphinxapi.php - F/OSS, packaged (sphinx-php)
>
> * tmhoauth - F/OSS, unpackaged -
> https://github.com/themattharris/tmhOAuth
>
> * xsl_mop-up.js - public domain, unpackaged -
> http://www.fadshop.net/xsl_mop-up.js but link is dead, ref
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98168 . probably a copylib
>
> So the major issues that come up: prototypejs seems to be embedded into
> an awful lot of Fedora packages, if you look at
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523277 as a reference.
> mediatomb has a copy, wordpress has a copy, python-webhelpers has a copy
> (actually it seems it's not there any more), python-Scriptaculous has a
> copy, asterisk has a copy. Isn't this a major issue? Should I file a bug
> for this and try to split prototypejs out into a single package which
> all those other packages could depend on, or am I missing something? Has
> it been declared a copylib? wordpress review request does not appear to
> have dealt with it, stating "* no shared libraries are present: okay" -
> I don't know if it was missed, or wasn't present in wordpress at the
> time of review. mediatomb review similarly didn't catch it.
>
> python-Scriptaculous seems to be a python (TurboGears) wrapper for
> scriptaculous, and it has scriptaculous and prototypejs embedded in it.
> the review request doesn't seem to have dealt with this at all, it
> simply states "+ no headers or static libraries.", which seems to be,
> well, a bit of a porky. =)
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508510 . should I raise this
> as a bug, or again, am I missing something?
>
> If anyone clueful has thoughts on the prototypejs and
> python-scriptaculous issues, or on which of the tt-rss deps are likely
> copylibs and don't need to be packaged separately, that'd be really
> helpful. thanks!

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 08-31-2011, 05:52 AM
Remi
 
Default Oh god, my eyes (packaging a hairball of bundled PHP stuff, tt-rss)

>From : https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Duplication_of_system_librari es

"At this time JavaScript intended to be served to a web browser is specifically exempted from this but this will likely change in the future."

This explain why so much .js libraries are bundled in so much wedapps.

Remi.


----- Mail original -----
> Speaking about prototype and scriptaculous, I am sure that they are
> bundled also in Rails and if there are some Rails applications
> packaged,
> they will be included also in them. However I am not sure if they
> should
> be packaged separately or just copylibs.
>
> Vit
>
>
>
> Dne 31.8.2011 06:35, Adam Williamson napsal(a):
> > Hey, all. So, I'm looking at packaging tt-rss - an RSS reader
> > implemented as a PHP webapp - for Fedora, since I run it on my own
> > server. It became rapidly clear that it's a landmine of bundled PHP
> > libraries and snippets and uncertain licensing. I'm unsure which of
> > the
> > things it bundles would be likely to qualify as copylibs, and also
> > a few
> > of the things it bundles seem to raise wider questions, so I
> > thought I'd
> > post my 'deps list' here and raise some of the issues:
> >
> > * dojo/dijit - F/OSS, packaged
> >
> > * simplepie - F/OSS, packaged
> >
> > * CheckBoxTree.js - requires formal license, unpackaged -
> > http://www.thejekels.com/blog/dojo/dijit-tree-with-multi-state-checkboxes/comment-page-1/#comment-46
> > . not entirely sure whether this would count as a copylib.
> >
> > * htmlpurifier - F/OSS, unpackaged but its PEAR channel is packaged
> > as
> > php-channel-htmlpurifier, review at
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542045
> >
> > * iui - F/OSS, unpackaged - https://code.google.com/p/iui/
> >
> > * MiniTemplator - F/OSS, unpackaged -
> > http://www.source-code.biz/MiniTemplator/
> >
> > * phpmailer - F/OSS, packaged
> >
> > * position.js - comprises
> > http://codesnippets.joyent.com/posts/show/835
> > and http://codesnippets.joyent.com/posts/show/836 - unlicensed,
> > author
> > contacted - these are probably copylibs?
> >
> > * prototypejs - F/OSS, unpackaged, already embedded in many other
> > packages - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523277
> >
> > * php-pubsubhubbub - F/OSS, unpackaged:
> > https://code.google.com/p/pubsubhubbub/ (was
> > https://code.google.com/p/pubsubhubbub-php/ , merged into upstream)
> >
> > * scriptaculous - F/OSS, mostly unpackaged, but part of
> > http://pypi.python.org/pypi/Scriptaculous , which is a python
> > wrapper
> > with old versions of scriptaculous and prototype embedded in it
> >
> > * sphinxapi.php - F/OSS, packaged (sphinx-php)
> >
> > * tmhoauth - F/OSS, unpackaged -
> > https://github.com/themattharris/tmhOAuth
> >
> > * xsl_mop-up.js - public domain, unpackaged -
> > http://www.fadshop.net/xsl_mop-up.js but link is dead, ref
> > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98168 . probably a
> > copylib
> >
> > So the major issues that come up: prototypejs seems to be embedded
> > into
> > an awful lot of Fedora packages, if you look at
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523277 as a reference.
> > mediatomb has a copy, wordpress has a copy, python-webhelpers has a
> > copy
> > (actually it seems it's not there any more), python-Scriptaculous
> > has a
> > copy, asterisk has a copy. Isn't this a major issue? Should I file
> > a bug
> > for this and try to split prototypejs out into a single package
> > which
> > all those other packages could depend on, or am I missing
> > something? Has
> > it been declared a copylib? wordpress review request does not
> > appear to
> > have dealt with it, stating "* no shared libraries are present:
> > okay" -
> > I don't know if it was missed, or wasn't present in wordpress at
> > the
> > time of review. mediatomb review similarly didn't catch it.
> >
> > python-Scriptaculous seems to be a python (TurboGears) wrapper for
> > scriptaculous, and it has scriptaculous and prototypejs embedded in
> > it.
> > the review request doesn't seem to have dealt with this at all, it
> > simply states "+ no headers or static libraries.", which seems to
> > be,
> > well, a bit of a porky. =)
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508510 . should I raise
> > this
> > as a bug, or again, am I missing something?
> >
> > If anyone clueful has thoughts on the prototypejs and
> > python-scriptaculous issues, or on which of the tt-rss deps are
> > likely
> > copylibs and don't need to be packaged separately, that'd be really
> > helpful. thanks!
>
> --
> devel mailing list
> devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:56 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org