Mandag 23 mai 2011 18.08.32 skrev Steffen Möller : > Hello Yngve, > > On 05/23/2011 04:42 PM, Yngve Inntjore Levinsen wrote: > > On Monday 23 May 2011 14.19.44 Steffen Möller wrote: > >> Hello, > >> > >> On 05/23/2011 01:30 PM, Yngve Inntjore Levinsen wrote: > >>> On Monday 23 May 2011 12.29.15 Gürkan Sengün wrote: > >>>> That sounds fantastic, do you already have ready packages that I could > >>>> test? > >>> You can test the ROOT packages which we distribute from CERN > >>> (unofficially) here: > >>> > >>> http://cern.ch/lcg-heppkg/debian/ > >>> > >>> I assume Lifeng have used similar packaging scripts (and his efforts to > >>> get them into proper Debian channels are highly appreciated!). > >> I just read through those pages. You mention source and binary packages, > >> packaging for sid, > >> explained backports, reprepro, reads all very nice. > >> > >> Have you considered sharing your 'debian' folders with the Debian science > >> repository? There is no need to upload all the program code. And you do not > >> even need to have anything ready to be uploaded. This way you would share > >> you insights on how to compile on the various platforms through sharing the > >> build instructions. This should also allow to work with Lifeng together > >> on those > >> packages and everyone would feel exceptionally well about those, even > >> though your support would remain not to be official. You can e.g. use > >> README.Debian for a disclaimer. > >> > >> Best regards, > >> > >> Steffen > > Hi Steffen, > > > > I did not start this project, Axel Naumann and Kevin B. McCarty did. Since > > Kevin left the game I took over the Geant4 packaging (according to best > > efforts of course, I cannot give guarantees on the quality of my packaging > > from my level of expertise). People are more than welcome to download > > packaging scripts and suggest improvements/report bugs of course. The > > reason we keep it internally at CERN is, as explained, because of licensing > > problems and similar. > > > > I have not considered sharing the debian folders with Debian Science. I > > currently do not have much time on my hand to work on this, and I would > > expect that some quality control would have to be done etc (actually the > > latest Geant4 patch does not compile at the moment and I did not have time > > to fix). You are all free to download the sources using "apt-get source" of > > course, and I will be happy to try to explain what I have done. I am unsure > > if I understand your question though, you mean to give you the link of the > > folders from the server, or is there some "formal" way to publish the > > packaging scripts without the source code? I have no objection to > > distributing the packaging scripts (the respective authors would have to > > agree first), but the sources like CLHEP and Geant4 have difficult > > licensing so from what I understand we cannot distribute the sources > > outside CERN. > > > > Cheers, > > Yngve > > my field is computational biology but once helped to get Christian's > ROOT packages into the distribution when I was visiting Copenhagen more > frequently. In the subversion repositories it is considered good style > to only publish the debian folder, no source code. That should be > retrieved via the instructions in the debian/watch file or the > get-orig-source target in debian/rules or from the information in the > debian/copyright file. That debian folder is commonly GPLed and easily > comaintained, though this may differ if CERN has some policy I am not > aware of when you started it. With git, there is no technical > requirement but there it is common practice to indeed upload the source > code in a separate branch. I dislike that immensely, but nobody seems to > care about my aversion, so there are just a limited number of packages > that I co-maintain with git. > > I would not mind apt-get sourcing and uploading the debian folders from > there. But this would make sense only when you also use them. The > quality does not matter for a start. Just say that it does not > build/run. If the community cares then it will be fixed with or for you. > If not, then not. I could talk you through the process of manually > building with the debian folder in subversion and/or on how to use > svn-buildpackage for some package that you feel more comfortable with. > The redistribution of the binaries is a very different issue from the > sharing of packaging/build instructions. And to have only the latter for > some packages will still be helpful as an open invite to the community > to contribute. I blogged about this at > http://debianmed.blogspot.com/2011/04/debian-med-individuals-expertize-and.html > > Many greetings > > Steffen
Hi Steffen, Thanks for your reply. Your suggestion sounds very sane, and I was not aware that this was a possibility. I did already try to convert a less complex package to git-buildpackage system to see how that worked (namely madx/madx-dev). If I understand there is a possibility to use either svn or git, and in case I do not want to include the source files I should use svn? If I can find some spare time I will have a look at this more in detail, I would VERY much appreciate to have the build instructions stored in a more central place ( perhaps someone could even help me fix/maintain :) ). The only two that have worked on them are me and Kevin, and he actually asked me to see if I could potentially manage to publish the built packages in Debian Science (ie. deal with all the politics that comes with non-standard licensing). Hence the build-instructions have no licensing issues along with it. Cheers, Yngve
