On 2010-07-09, at 3:59 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 10:42 PM, Anas Nashif <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 2010-07-09, at 3:23 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>>> Suppose git wasn't packaged, the official tarball has a git.spec that
>>> is distro-agnostic. If you were to submit it to Fedora for inclusion,
>>> it would be accepted, I suppose it would also be accepted on openSUSE.
>>> 
>> Both suse and fedora have package review and acceptance guidelines, if a 
>> package is submitted that does not comply, it is rejected.
>> There is no rule that an upstream spec file has to be accepted as is, it 
>> really needs to comply with the distro. Depending on how complex it is, it 
>> might be accepted as, but that is no rule.
> 
> Yeas, but both Fedora and openSUSE guidelines are *sane*, and based
> upon existing good practices. In fact, openSUSE guidelines are based
> on Fedora guidelines.
> 
> So, chances are that if you write a clean spec file that compiles with
> Fedora guidelines, it will comply with openSUSE guidelines too. If
> not, then maybe it would require a bit of tweaking in order to make it
> distro-agnostic and compatible with both.
> 
> But MeeGo guidelines are completely different, and it's *impossible*
> to write a spec file (if such things are accepted on MeeGo) that
> complies with Fedora guidelines.

Long discussion, but I am still not sure exactly is "completely" different. Can 
you elaborate please?




> 
>>> But on MeeGo it would be rejected.
>> 
>> if it does not comply, then it is rejected, what is the problem with that?
> 
> If a clean distro-agnostic spec file doesn't comply with MeeGo
> guidelines, then the MeeGo guidelines have a design bug. Fix the bug
> and it will comply, and it will be accepted; problem solved.

Ok, can you please file a bug?


> 
>>>>> Wrong. MeeGo doesn't use spec files at all (which is how RPMs are
>>>>> supposed to be built). Instead, maintainers are supposed to write
>>>>> spectacle YAML files which are used in turn to generate spec files.
>>>> 
>>>> Um, they do?  Since when?  Did something change since this past
>>>> Wednesday when I built these packages?
>>> 
>>> Oh, they build fine, as OBS doesn't need spectacle YAMLs. The issue is
>>> about MeeGo _guidelines_, according to Arjan van de Ven, the spectacle
>>> YAMLs should also be there[1].
>> 
>> If a package spec file was generated using spectacle, then it only makes 
>> sense to include it in the source rpm. So if someone downloads the source 
>> rpm, they will also have the input and if they would need to make changes, 
>> they can use spectacle.
> 
> Yes.
> 
>> If your package does not use that, then you do not need to worry about it. 
>> We also clarified 1 week ago and on the wiki that it is NOT mandatory for 
>> all packages, it is however recommended for packages that are generic enough 
>> to be converted.
> 
> All right, but if my package is generic enough to be converted, but I
> *choose* *not* to, then that's fine; no spectacle YAML stuff needed
> from my package? You made it sound like the "build tooling" needed the
> spectacle file.

We have a few packages in meego that are made to build for every distro out 
there, like banshee and the mono packages used on netbook.


Anas


> 
> -- 
> Felipe Contreras
> _______________________________________________
> MeeGo-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev

_______________________________________________
MeeGo-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev

Reply via email to