Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

On 12/14/2016 11:17 AM, Bastien Nocera wrote: You're right, it's better :) By technology involved, true. But until there is a Fedora (or another distribution) flatpack build service, there is no replacement for a Fedora built RPM package. It doesn't matter you trust the developer, you must

Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 11:17:01PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Indeed, almost all the containers, app bundles etc. out there are > outright illegal, because they just repackage a random distro's > packages without including the corresponding SRPMs or equivalent. The > full corresponding sources

Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

Florian Weimer wrote: > But these packaging systems produce source and binary packages at the > same time. In contrast, I have yet to encounter a container build > service which does that. This has the side effect that GPL compliance > and general availability of matching source code is rather

Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

Bastien Nocera wrote: > You're right, it's better :) If you define "better" as larger download, higher use of RAM and disk space, less system integration, fewer and less timely security fixes and other bugfixes, etc., then yes, Flatpak is "better". ^^ See also

Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: > On 12/14/2016 05:55 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > >> I disagree with this assertion. Flatpak, snappy, docker containers, >> etc are not an indication people are giving up on Free Software. They >> are a mechanism the

Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

On 12/14/2016 05:55 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: I disagree with this assertion. Flatpak, snappy, docker containers, etc are not an indication people are giving up on Free Software. They are a mechanism the focuses on easing a developer's ability to distribute their software without worrying about

Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 10:52 AM, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 10:27 AM, Christian Schaller > wrote: >> That is not 100% correct. You can make a non-sandboxed Flatpak and >> it would work just as well as an RPM in terms of hardware access.

Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

omp...@gmail.com> > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > <devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> > Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2016 10:52:37 AM > Subject: Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 10:27

Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 10:27 AM, Christian Schaller wrote: > That is not 100% correct. You can make a non-sandboxed Flatpak and > it would work just as well as an RPM in terms of hardware access. > Enabling sandboxing however would need some thought and development > for a

Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 10:27:36AM -0500, Christian Schaller wrote: > That is not 100% correct. You can make a non-sandboxed Flatpak and > it would work just as well as an RPM in terms of hardware access. > Enabling sandboxing however would need some thought and development > for a lot of such

Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

;devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> > Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2016 10:21:32 AM > Subject: Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 10:17 AM, Bastien Nocera <bnoc...@redhat.com> wrote: > > You're right, it's better :) &g

Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 10:17 AM, Bastien Nocera wrote: > You're right, it's better :) > Not really. Flatpak is incredibly limited in its abilities. Applications that interface with hardware directly are out of the question, for example. That means lots of pro-AV applications

Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

You're right, it's better :) - Original Message - > Bastien Nocera wrote: > > I would advise you to look into packaging your application using Flatpak: > > http://flatpak.org/ > > so that you can package your application for both Fedora, and every other > > distribution out there that has

Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

Bastien Nocera wrote: > I would advise you to look into packaging your application using Flatpak: > http://flatpak.org/ > so that you can package your application for both Fedora, and every other > distribution out there that has Flatpak available to it. That is no replacement for a native RPM

Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

Hey Joel, - Original Message - > Hi all > > My name is Joël Krähemann. I maintain Advanced Gtk+ Sequencer and I'd > like to provide it in fedora. Linux is my OS of choice since 2001. > Along the time I have used many distributions like debian, linux from > scratch, SUSE, fedora and a few

Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 03:58:41PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Sat, 10 Dec 2016 04:18:44 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > > > >> Here find some helpful links about the Fedora Packager and their > > > >> processes: > > > >> > > > >> * > > > >>

Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

On Sat, 10 Dec 2016 04:18:44 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > >> Here find some helpful links about the Fedora Packager and their > > >> processes: > > >> > > >> * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers > > >> *

Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

On Fri, Dec 09, 2016 at 09:57:07PM +0100, Joël Krähemann wrote: > Hi all > > Just modified the gsequencer.spec file. Now, it should be more the fedora way. > > https://sourceforge.net/projects/ags/files/fedora/ > > Additionally, I uploaded the srpm and rpm packages built. > > * gsequencer > *

Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

Hi all For your information http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16809691 https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jkraehemann/gsequencer/ Bests, Joël On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 10:15 PM, Joël Krähemann wrote: > Hi Michael > > I'm not sure of what packaging

Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

Hi Michael I'm not sure of what packaging mistakes you are talking. I just updated the spec file and removed the requires field. But yes, I'd like to give it for review now. Bests, Joël On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 10:04 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Fri, 9 Dec 2016

Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

On Fri, 9 Dec 2016 21:57:07 +0100, Joël Krähemann wrote: > Hi all > > Just modified the gsequencer.spec file. Now, it should be more the fedora way. > > https://sourceforge.net/projects/ags/files/fedora/ > > Additionally, I uploaded the srpm and rpm packages built. > > * gsequencer > *

Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

Hi all Just modified the gsequencer.spec file. Now, it should be more the fedora way. https://sourceforge.net/projects/ags/files/fedora/ Additionally, I uploaded the srpm and rpm packages built. * gsequencer * gsequencer-devel * gsequencer-devel-docs * gsequencer-debuginfo Bests, Joël On

Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 05:13:24PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 15:21:21 +0100, Joël Krähemann wrote: > > > My name is Joël Krähemann. I maintain Advanced Gtk+ Sequencer and I'd > > like to provide it in fedora. Linux is my OS of choice since 2001. > > Along the time I have

Re: GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 15:21:21 +0100, Joël Krähemann wrote: > My name is Joël Krähemann. I maintain Advanced Gtk+ Sequencer and I'd > like to provide it in fedora. Linux is my OS of choice since 2001. > Along the time I have used many distributions like debian, linux from > scratch, SUSE, fedora and

GSequencer upstream wants to package for fedora

Hi all My name is Joël Krähemann. I maintain Advanced Gtk+ Sequencer and I'd like to provide it in fedora. Linux is my OS of choice since 2001. Along the time I have used many distributions like debian, linux from scratch, SUSE, fedora and a few others. Prior I did an RPM spec provided on: