Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: file-roller https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225751 ------- Additional Comments From toshio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2007-02-08 21:07 EST ------- I see two issues being expressed here: 1) Convenience. file-roller will need a one-character change in the spec approximately four times per year. 2) Factuality. When we are heavily involved with upstream (ex: Mozilla), there will be times when we have access to tarballs that aren't yet available in publicly available trees. These are the reasons not to include the full URL in the source line. The reasons for having the full source URL are to help reviewers, qa people, and automated scripts find and verify the source. I asked about this on fedora-packaging and got a limited response where #1 was seen as not having significant benefits for a change. #2 was seen as something that we need to make an exception for but needed more information. So if you're okay with it, I'd like to drop trying to change #1 and concentrate on #2. For #2, we'd like to know if the source tarball eventually lands at a specific URL or if it's often not publically available at all. Is it a snapshot or something more formal? If the tarball eventually lands someplace, just that it wouldn't necessarily be present at the time we build, then we probably want to include the full URL where the tarball will eventually land with a note that the source may not be present there at this exact moment. If the source will never land one person suggested using a patch against the last released tarball. Another suggestion was to allow the mozilla source to go through with a spec file comment explaining why there is no upstream URL. A third suggestion was to treat it like a Red Hat created application which is only distributed in the srpm. We don't have a policy for that yet so what the proceedure will be for that is unknown. If that's the route you think we need to go, I'll start drafting something with Jeremy and let you know what it looks like. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review