On 2014-10-01 00:41:38 +1000 (+1000), Nick Coghlan wrote: [...] > Which distro packagers? For Fedora, even if we pull from an > upstream source control system, we'll still wrap it as a tarball > inside an SRPM in order to feed it into the buld system. [...]
Precisely that. Also lot of Debian, Ubuntu, SuSE, et cetera packagers are following that same pattern. Even when there is an upstream release tarball available, many prefer to create one from the VCS themselves and use that as the basis for their packaging. What I've seen suggests the increase in (not necessarily Python-based) projects who don't bother to create tarballs and simply "release" from their version control systems has resulted in a proliferation of distro packager countermeasures/immune responses. They're beginning to rely on tools which automate dealing with the fact that there may be no initial tarball (Debian's git-buildpackage for example), and in the end it becomes easier for them to just assume there is never an initial tarball and always create their own anyway. So while their packaging formats use tarballs internally, a lot of them are no longer using *upstream-provided* tarballs in source packages and the existence of tarballs in their source packages has instead become a mere implementation detail. -- Jeremy Stanley _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig