On Thu October 9 2008, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Thu, 2008-10-09 at 18:16 +0200, Till Maas wrote: > > On Thu October 9 2008, Jesse Keating wrote: > > > 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. > > > > If this is the only obstacle to get this done, I will write a patch for > > Makefile.common that displays the URL for every file in sources to fetch > > it from the lookaside cache. Then this URL can be provided as source > > tarball on a fedorahosted wiki page. > > Why must we insist on tarballs? Unless the tarball includes scm > metadata in it, it's practically useless for upstream patch development. Tarballs allow to easily build the desired software via rpm and test it. With make patch and make rediff and make prep from Makefile.common it is also pretty easy to create and update patches. I have sucessfully created patches for upstream using this. Using directly an upstream scm, it is always a PITA to make the spec build from there, because the spec needs to be heavily modificated or I have to remember to recreate the tarball everytime. It would like it very much, if this would be a lot easier, e.g. some intelligent macros in spec files that allow to use a scm instead of a tarball to be used as Source0 and some magic that allows to define what from the scm should be used, e.g. should uncommited changes be used? Nevertheless, there have to be tarballs in the cvs lookaside cache, therefore it is not much work to link to them. Therefore I do not really see what needs to be discussed here. ;-) Regards, Till
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
