Re: [tor-talk] torsocks 1.3 is tagged and released
Hi, Nick Mathewson wrote (22 Feb 2013 17:47:34 GMT) : [...] so I've uploaded a tarball to [...] Thanks! Since I was given conflicting information from Nick and Jake on this topic, I've used the data source that had the most information in it (i.e. the tarball) as a basis for torsocks 1.3-1 that I've eventually uploaded to Debian experimental. I'll be happy if Jacob and Nick find an agreement and give a single authoritative answer on the tag / tarball topic for 1.4 :) As an extra wrinkle, this is my first time running make dist on torsocks, so it's possible that make dist has bugs that don't appear when using the tags. I've compared the content of the tarball and the content of the tagged Git tree, and the result seems good enough. I'm not sure if it's on purpose that the tarball doesn't ship FAQ, README.TORDNS, nor doc/tsocks.conf.*, though. The previous release didn't either. Please open tickets if so; caveat haxxor. :/ Sure. FWIW, it would be a bit easier to try and avoid reporting duplicates if there was a dedicated Trac tickets report, listed on the available reports page [1], for the torsocks component. I managed to get myself such a report by modifying the URL of another existing report, but I doubt everyone would do that. [1] https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/report Cheers, -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc ___ tor-talk mailing list tor-talk@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] torsocks 1.3 is tagged and released
Hi, Jacob Appelbaum wrote (12 Feb 2013 19:25:59 GMT) : intrigeri: A Git tag integrates perfectly with packaging workflow... iff it's the canonical form of distribution of the complete upstream release. [...] I'll discuss it with nickm and see what he thinks. A tar.gz isn't too much of a problem but I'm not sure of where I'd put it. FTR, I'm waiting for an authoritative upstream answer on this before I upload 1.3 to the Debian archive. I'm more and more tempted to take the Git tag as the canonical form of distribution of the complete upstream release, which it seems to be in practice, given there's no tarball that I can find 10 days after the release was announced (and again, the Git tag suits me well). Cheers, -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc ___ tor-talk mailing list tor-talk@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] torsocks 1.3 is tagged and released
On 22/02/13 17:09, intrigeri wrote: FTR, I'm waiting for an authoritative upstream answer on this before I upload 1.3 to the Debian archive. Ditto for Fedora. I'm more and more tempted to take the Git tag as the canonical form of distribution of the complete upstream release, which it seems to be in practice, given there's no tarball that I can find 10 days after the release was announced (and again, the Git tag suits me well). I'd be happy enough with a Git tag also, but a tarball would be lovely. -- Jamie Nguyen ___ tor-talk mailing list tor-talk@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] torsocks 1.3 is tagged and released
intrigeri: Hi, Jacob Appelbaum wrote (12 Feb 2013 19:25:59 GMT) : intrigeri: A Git tag integrates perfectly with packaging workflow... iff it's the canonical form of distribution of the complete upstream release. [...] I'll discuss it with nickm and see what he thinks. A tar.gz isn't too much of a problem but I'm not sure of where I'd put it. FTR, I'm waiting for an authoritative upstream answer on this before I upload 1.3 to the Debian archive. I'm more and more tempted to take the Git tag as the canonical form of distribution of the complete upstream release, which it seems to be in practice, given there's no tarball that I can find 10 days after the release was announced (and again, the Git tag suits me well). For now, I'd like to suggest that you use the git tag. All the best, Jacob ___ tor-talk mailing list tor-talk@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] torsocks 1.3 is tagged and released
Nick Mathewson: On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 12:09 PM, intrigeri intrig...@boum.org wrote: Hi, Jacob Appelbaum wrote (12 Feb 2013 19:25:59 GMT) : intrigeri: A Git tag integrates perfectly with packaging workflow... iff it's the canonical form of distribution of the complete upstream release. [...] I'll discuss it with nickm and see what he thinks. A tar.gz isn't too much of a problem but I'm not sure of where I'd put it. FTR, I'm waiting for an authoritative upstream answer on this before I upload 1.3 to the Debian archive. I'm more and more tempted to take the Git tag as the canonical form of distribution of the complete upstream release, which it seems to be in practice, given there's no tarball that I can find 10 days after the release was announced (and again, the Git tag suits me well). Hm. It looks like Jacob is might just be completely hosed right now, so I've uploaded a tarball to http://www.wangafu.net/~nickm/torsocks-1.3.tar.gz and a signature to http://www.wangafu.net/~nickm/torsocks-1.3.tar.gz.asc. I hope we get get these put somewhere more official soon. I think this is probably a fine idea but I'd like them to go on people.torproject.org or into torproject.org/disk/torsocks/ - does that seem like a good place? As an extra wrinkle, this is my first time running make dist on torsocks, so it's possible that make dist has bugs that don't appear when using the tags. Please open tickets if so; caveat haxxor. :/ We should probably make dist in some standard way - perhaps on a build machine we trust? All the best, Jake ___ tor-talk mailing list tor-talk@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] torsocks 1.3 is tagged and released
Hi Jacob, Jacob Appelbaum wrote (12 Feb 2013 00:54:46 GMT) : After quite a long development cycle, we've tagged torsocks 1.3 today: https://gitweb.torproject.org/torsocks.git/shortlog/refs/tags/1.3 Awesome! Do you plan to release it in form of a tarball, or is the Git tag the canonical way to get the released code? Cheers, -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc ___ tor-talk mailing list tor-talk@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] torsocks 1.3 is tagged and released
intrigeri: Hi Jacob, Jacob Appelbaum wrote (12 Feb 2013 00:54:46 GMT) : After quite a long development cycle, we've tagged torsocks 1.3 today: https://gitweb.torproject.org/torsocks.git/shortlog/refs/tags/1.3 Awesome! Do you plan to release it in form of a tarball, or is the Git tag the canonical way to get the released code? Would you like a tar.gz and a tar.gz.asc? If so, I'll put the two files up. All the best, Jacob ___ tor-talk mailing list tor-talk@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] torsocks 1.3 is tagged and released
Hi, Jacob Appelbaum wrote (12 Feb 2013 16:40:01 GMT) : Would you like a tar.gz and a tar.gz.asc? A Git tag integrates perfectly with packaging workflow... iff it's the canonical form of distribution of the complete upstream release. If a tarball with slightly different content (e.g. that includes autotools generated stuff) is going to be published, and is considered to be the canonical released source code, then I'll deal with it and take the tarball, but I'm certainly not asking for it :) Cheers! ___ tor-talk mailing list tor-talk@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] torsocks 1.3 is tagged and released
Jacob Appelbaum: intrigeri: Hi Jacob, Jacob Appelbaum wrote (12 Feb 2013 00:54:46 GMT) : After quite a long development cycle, we've tagged torsocks 1.3 today: https://gitweb.torproject.org/torsocks.git/shortlog/refs/tags/1.3 Awesome! Do you plan to release it in form of a tarball, or is the Git tag the canonical way to get the released code? Would you like a tar.gz and a tar.gz.asc? If so, I'll put the two files up. I am also happy with a signed git tag. When you call for testing next time, please also provide a signed git tag. ___ tor-talk mailing list tor-talk@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] torsocks 1.3 is tagged and released
intrigeri: Hi, Jacob Appelbaum wrote (12 Feb 2013 16:40:01 GMT) : Would you like a tar.gz and a tar.gz.asc? A Git tag integrates perfectly with packaging workflow... iff it's the canonical form of distribution of the complete upstream release. If a tarball with slightly different content (e.g. that includes autotools generated stuff) is going to be published, and is considered to be the canonical released source code, then I'll deal with it and take the tarball, but I'm certainly not asking for it :) I'll discuss it with nickm and see what he thinks. A tar.gz isn't too much of a problem but I'm not sure of where I'd put it. All the best, Jacob ___ tor-talk mailing list tor-talk@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
Re: [tor-talk] torsocks 1.3 is tagged and released
adrelanos: Jacob Appelbaum: intrigeri: Hi Jacob, Jacob Appelbaum wrote (12 Feb 2013 00:54:46 GMT) : After quite a long development cycle, we've tagged torsocks 1.3 today: https://gitweb.torproject.org/torsocks.git/shortlog/refs/tags/1.3 Awesome! Do you plan to release it in form of a tarball, or is the Git tag the canonical way to get the released code? Would you like a tar.gz and a tar.gz.asc? If so, I'll put the two files up. I am also happy with a signed git tag. When you call for testing next time, please also provide a signed git tag. I only plan on signing actual releases. In the future, the RC releases may be 'actual releases' but I'm not clear that we should have such long iterations. I'd like to get 1.4 our in the next month, for example. All the best, Jacob ___ tor-talk mailing list tor-talk@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
[tor-talk] torsocks 1.3 is tagged and released
Hi, After quite a long development cycle, we've tagged torsocks 1.3 today: https://gitweb.torproject.org/torsocks.git/shortlog/refs/tags/1.3 We believe that this release fixes most of the outstanding torsocks issues. We also also hope that it merges all of the various patches that were being shared in the community. Please report any new bugs or patches on the Tor bug tracker! If you'd like to see the current set of bugs and the future improvements, please visit the bug tracker for the torsocks component: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/query?component=Torsocks All the best, Jacob ___ tor-talk mailing list tor-talk@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
