Re: [SoaS] Policy for activities for downstream inclusion
On 15.09.2010, at 00:07, [email protected] wrote: > On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 10:51 PM, Bert Freudenberg > wrote: > >> And (from your other msg) why do you want both zip (xo) and tar balls? > > I just want sure source code only tarfiles. I presume for a.sl.o > there's a need for ready to run .xo files which may or may not contain > pre compiled binaries. Thanks, that's clearer :) - Bert - ___ SoaS mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas
Re: [SoaS] Policy for activities for downstream inclusion
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 10:51 PM, Bert Freudenberg wrote: > On 14.09.2010, at 23:15, [email protected] wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Walter Bender >> wrote: >>> On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 10:05 AM, David Farning wrote: In the .deb side of the universe, we prefer tarballs but we can work directly from the git repository. >>> >>> Is it not still the practice to put tarballs on download.sl.o ??? >> >> No its not! Sebastian and I got sick of sounding like broken down >> records so I have no idea of the current status. > > Not sure I can parse what you mean. Are you saying it is not current practice > but it should be? It seems it generally doesn't happen. No idea if its policy or not. > And (from your other msg) why do you want both zip (xo) and tar balls? I just want sure source code only tarfiles. I presume for a.sl.o there's a need for ready to run .xo files which may or may not contain pre compiled binaries. Peter ___ SoaS mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas
Re: [SoaS] Policy for activities for downstream inclusion
On 14.09.2010, at 23:15, [email protected] wrote: > On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Walter Bender > wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 10:05 AM, David Farning wrote: >>> >>> In the .deb side of the universe, we prefer tarballs but we can work >>> directly from the git repository. >> >> Is it not still the practice to put tarballs on download.sl.o ??? > > No its not! Sebastian and I got sick of sounding like broken down > records so I have no idea of the current status. Not sure I can parse what you mean. Are you saying it is not current practice but it should be? And (from your other msg) why do you want both zip (xo) and tar balls? - Bert - ___ SoaS mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas
Re: [SoaS] Policy for activities for downstream inclusion
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Simon Schampijer wrote: > Hi, > > what is the current status for activity releases in order to include > them in distributions like Soas*? Do you guys need tarballs or did you > switch over to construct the rpms from the .xo? For example the latest > Paint rpm uses the .xo AFAIK (build even the binaries from the > non-python sources in the bundle). In some cases we've used .xo files but its not ideal and its caused us packaging issues in Fedora as in a lot of cases the .xo files include binary blobs which is against Fedora packaging policies so we have to jump through extra hoops and its generally a pain we'd like to avoid! Personally I'm moving to the point where if there's not a tarball I won't spend my time packaging it. > And is the email from ASLO enough for packagers to know about new > releases? Any other notification that packagers need? That is generally enough but a direct link to both the .xo and tarball makes it quicker for me to update packages as I can grab it from the email. Peter ___ SoaS mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas
Re: [SoaS] Policy for activities for downstream inclusion
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Walter Bender wrote: > On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 10:05 AM, David Farning wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 5:27 AM, Simon Schampijer >> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> what is the current status for activity releases in order to include >>> them in distributions like Soas*? Do you guys need tarballs or did you >>> switch over to construct the rpms from the .xo? For example the latest >>> Paint rpm uses the .xo AFAIK (build even the binaries from the >>> non-python sources in the bundle). >>> >>> And is the email from ASLO enough for packagers to know about new >>> releases? Any other notification that packagers need? >> >> In the .deb side of the universe, we prefer tarballs but we can work >> directly from the git repository. > > Is it not still the practice to put tarballs on download.sl.o ??? No its not! Sebastian and I got sick of sounding like broken down records so I have no idea of the current status. Peter ___ SoaS mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas
Re: [SoaS] Policy for activities for downstream inclusion
Thanks David and Walter for the feedback, On 09/14/2010 04:09 PM, Walter Bender wrote: > On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 10:05 AM, David Farning wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 5:27 AM, Simon Schampijer >> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> what is the current status for activity releases in order to include >>> them in distributions like Soas*? Do you guys need tarballs or did you >>> switch over to construct the rpms from the .xo? For example the latest >>> Paint rpm uses the .xo AFAIK (build even the binaries from the >>> non-python sources in the bundle). >>> >>> And is the email from ASLO enough for packagers to know about new >>> releases? Any other notification that packagers need? >> >> In the .deb side of the universe, we prefer tarballs but we can work >> directly from the git repository. We should not go from the git repository. Either use the .xo or a tarball. > Is it not still the practice to put tarballs on download.sl.o ??? > > -walter Well, the latest mails I have seen about activity releases (besides Chat) does come from ASLO and only state the .xo. If there are tarballs at d.sl.o they have not been announced ;D Regards, Simon ___ SoaS mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas
Re: [SoaS] Policy for activities for downstream inclusion
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 10:05 AM, David Farning wrote: > On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 5:27 AM, Simon Schampijer wrote: >> Hi, >> >> what is the current status for activity releases in order to include >> them in distributions like Soas*? Do you guys need tarballs or did you >> switch over to construct the rpms from the .xo? For example the latest >> Paint rpm uses the .xo AFAIK (build even the binaries from the >> non-python sources in the bundle). >> >> And is the email from ASLO enough for packagers to know about new >> releases? Any other notification that packagers need? > > In the .deb side of the universe, we prefer tarballs but we can work > directly from the git repository. Is it not still the practice to put tarballs on download.sl.o ??? -walter > > I have cced jonas for an official position. > > david > >> Regards, >> Simon >> >> * Of course any other downstreams that package/include activities are >> happy to reply to this email too. >> ___ >> SoaS mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas >> > ___ > SoaS mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas > -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org ___ SoaS mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas
Re: [SoaS] Policy for activities for downstream inclusion
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 5:27 AM, Simon Schampijer wrote: > Hi, > > what is the current status for activity releases in order to include > them in distributions like Soas*? Do you guys need tarballs or did you > switch over to construct the rpms from the .xo? For example the latest > Paint rpm uses the .xo AFAIK (build even the binaries from the > non-python sources in the bundle). > > And is the email from ASLO enough for packagers to know about new > releases? Any other notification that packagers need? In the .deb side of the universe, we prefer tarballs but we can work directly from the git repository. I have cced jonas for an official position. david > Regards, > Simon > > * Of course any other downstreams that package/include activities are > happy to reply to this email too. > ___ > SoaS mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas > ___ SoaS mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas
