On 2010-07-09, at 5:09 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 11:06 PM, Anas Nashif <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 2010-07-09, at 3:59 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>>> 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?
> 
> 1) spectacle YAML files are *required*

http://wiki.meego.com/Packaging/Guidelines#Writing_a_package_from_scratch

a few lines in the paragraph it reads:

"It is NOT mandatory to use spectacle for ALL packages"

It is however recommended for simple to mid-complex packages, I would not want 
to see this used for glibc or gcc for example, although it is possible :)

> 2) .changes instead of %changelog
> 

First, opensuse uses that, so we are not "entirely" different. 
Second, the end result is a spec file in source rpm that has the contents of 
<package>.changes. (This way of packaging changes comes historically from the 
days when suse was based on slackware.) 
The build service looks for this file during build and adds the %changelog 
entry at the bottom of the spec file.
So, end result is a spec file with %changelog.
We adopted this, it is built-in in the build system and we are not doing 
anything out of the ordinary. It just works as expected.

We are not really interested in changelog entries from the upstream, we just 
care for whatever is in meego, since day 0 of a package is in meego and not 
when an upstream developer created that spec. Now, since we had some spec files 
from other distros initially, you will notice many packages that still carry 
the original authors log entries, our goal to eliminate this and have MeeGo 
package all be original meego.

We do not have any requirements to make our specs build on anything but meego, 
however we make every attempt to not deviate from common practices and at 
aleast make it easy. One nice example is using pkgconfig and reducing the 
amount of explicit dependencies (those that are determined by rpm during build 
time automatically).


> Now, I've heard conflicting stories from you for 1). On one hand you
> say that it's not mandatory, but recommended for simple packaged. On
> another hand you say it's used by the "build tooling".
> 
> If you accept that spectacle YAML files are completely optional,
> regardless of the complexity, and will *remain* that way. Then I think
> that's fine.
> 
> It would still be nice to know what did you mean by this:
> http://lists.meego.com/pipermail/meego-packaging/2010-July/000411.html
> 
> Are you planing to make spectacle files mandatory?
> 
>>>>> 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?
> 
> Where?
> 

bugs.meego.com

>>>> 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.
> 
> Build yes, but not comply with the guidelines.

What guidelines? 


> 
> Besides, you didn't answer my question. Will spectacle files remain
> completely optional?
> 

See above. You are not forced to submit a package in spectacle format, someone 
however might pick it up and do that if it makes sense. At some point we have 
converted over 300 packages in one shot using scripts, because it is really 
easy :)

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