On 14/03/16 13:12, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 9:15 PM, David Timms <dtimms@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Hi, I've worked out what seemed to be a correct URL for for rakarrack >> spec, now that it is accessed via git within the sf website: >> >> I couldn't work out how to fit the sourceforce git URLs from: >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Sourceforge.net >> or >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Git_Hosting_Services >> >> to suit. Any ideas for a standard way to handle sf git snapshots ? > > Move them to github. Seriously. Sourceforge has been playing various > games to avoid accessing content without going through their > adveritising functions since they were first founded, and I've found > no reason to work with any project hosted there since..... checking > old notes, not since 2009. I do not have power over upstream. I'm talking about downstream packaging. I'd like to hear from someone with a legit answer, please ? >> Is the provided URL (which goes stale quickly, yet is re-generate-able) OK ? > > If it goes stale quickly, I'd consider it useless. Git was not > designed to support magical dancing URL's, that kind of instability > takes actual planning and work to inflict on the software repository > and on its users.. I think it's quite reasonable; they have the complete content stored as git diffs, they then do-not need to store a zip archive after every commit ever made. Instead, just create one when someone asks for it... I'm really asking how I should write my .spec Source0 url.. maybe I could write 2x lines (one that triggers the creation of the archive, and the second which is the actual location) ?? -- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
