Re: [gentoo-dev] perforce client proper license
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 2:58 AM, Alec Warner anta...@gentoo.org wrote: I think you will encounter namespace collisions, thats why I CC'd zac as he maintains mirror-dist ;p Why the hell didn't we think of this before!? :o The mirror-dist script *cannot* rename the upstream files for storage, since emerge will be looking for the *original* filename on the gentoo mirror. And if we keep them the same, we'll have collisions on the mirror, which is more probable (and severe) than a collision on a user's local DISTDIR. The easiest solution I can think of is for emerge to give special consideration to the mirrors in GENTOO_MIRRORS, and look for the renamed file there instead of the original ones. -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan who is extremely bewildered by this oversight
Re: [gentoo-dev] perforce client proper license
On Sunday 22 March 2009, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 2:58 AM, Alec Warner anta...@gentoo.org wrote: I think you will encounter namespace collisions, thats why I CC'd zac as he maintains mirror-dist ;p Why the hell didn't we think of this before!? :o The mirror-dist script *cannot* rename the upstream files for storage, since emerge will be looking for the *original* filename on the gentoo mirror. And if we keep them the same, we'll have collisions on the mirror, which is more probable (and severe) than a collision on a user's local DISTDIR. The easiest solution I can think of is for emerge to give special consideration to the mirrors in GENTOO_MIRRORS, and look for the renamed file there instead of the original ones. No reason to panic. :-) This is what Portage already does and what is specified in EAPI=2. Refer to the paragraph quoted by Ciaran earlier in this thread. Do we have a reason to believe our mirror scripts do not already handle this correctly? Because to me it seems they do. $ ebuild bashburn-3.0.ebuild unpack Downloading 'http://ftp.spline.inf.fu-berlin.de/mirrors/gentoo/distfiles/BashBurn-3.0.tar.gz' --2009-03-22 15:48:57-- http://ftp.spline.inf.fu-berlin.de/mirrors/gentoo/distfiles/BashBurn-3.0.tar.gz Resolving ftp.spline.inf.fu-berlin.de... 130.133.110.66 Connecting to ftp.spline.inf.fu-berlin.de|130.133.110.66|:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: 84435 (82K) [application/octet-stream] Saving to: `/usr/portage/distfiles/BashBurn-3.0.tar.gz' ... $ G ENTOO_MIRRORS= ebuild bashburn-3.0.ebuild unpack Downloading 'http://bashburn.dose.se/index.php?s=file_downloadid=3' --2009-03-22 15:49:12-- http://bashburn.dose.se/index.php?s=file_downloadid=3 Resolving bashburn.dose.se... 90.227.105.216 Connecting to bashburn.dose.se|90.227.105.216|:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: unspecified [application/octet-stream] Saving to: `/usr/portage/distfiles/BashBurn-3.0.tar.gz' Robert signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] perforce client proper license
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 11:44:48 +0530
Nirbheek Chauhan nirbh...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 2:58 AM, Alec Warner anta...@gentoo.org
wrote:
I think you will encounter namespace collisions, thats why I CC'd
zac as he maintains mirror-dist ;p
Why the hell didn't we think of this before!? :o
Uhm. We did. PMS is worded very carefully to ensure that this all
works. The only question is whether Portage's mirroring scripts are
broken. Alec seems to think they are; I'm sceptical, because a) I
pestered Zac about the issue really early on, and b) I strongly suspect
we'd've seen the breakage by now if they were.
The easiest solution I can think of is for emerge to give special
consideration to the mirrors in GENTOO_MIRRORS, and look for the
renamed file there instead of the original ones.
I quote:
In EAPIs supporting arrows, if an arrow is used, the filename used when
saving to \t{DISTDIR} shall instead be the name on the right of the
arrow. When consulting mirrors (except for those explicitly listed on
the left of the arrow, if \t{mirror://} is used), the filename to the
right of the arrow shall be requested instead of the filename in the
URI.
--
Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] perforce client proper license
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 8:32 PM, Ciaran McCreesh
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
I quote:
In EAPIs supporting arrows, if an arrow is used, the filename used when
saving to \t{DISTDIR} shall instead be the name on the right of the
arrow. When consulting mirrors (except for those explicitly listed on
the left of the arrow, if \t{mirror://} is used), the filename to the
right of the arrow shall be requested instead of the filename in the
URI.
Right, thanks for clearing that up :)
/me heaves a sigh of relief
--
~Nirbheek Chauhan
Re: [gentoo-dev] perforce client proper license
On Saturday 21 March 2009 14:06:09 Markos Chandras wrote: Hello folks, Qt-creator[1] program can support perforce[2] software configuration manager. My concern is the perforce license. According to their site[3] there is a dual(?) license. There is the standard commercial license[4] and one for free software development[4]. Should I add both? Or am I missing something? Doing some research I found out that perforce-cli was in the portage back in 2006 but not anymore. Can somebody recall the reason why it is not there anymore? If it wasn't a license issue , I want to bring it back ( at least the client for now ). I am waiting your suggestions. Thank you [1] http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo-x86/dev-util/qt-creator/ [2] http://www.perforce.com/perforce/ [3] http://www.perforce.com/perforce/price.html#license [4] http://www.perforce.com/perforce/price.html#opensource Responding to my self, i decided not to bring this package on tree and instead use an ewarn message to inform user that if he wants perforce support, he needs to download the binary by himself. Thats not a big deal since the binary doesnt even require installation or anything else. -- Markos Chandras (hwoarang) Gentoo Linux Developer Qt/KDE/Sunrise/Sound Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.gr signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] perforce client proper license
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 8:02 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 11:44:48 +0530
Nirbheek Chauhan nirbh...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 2:58 AM, Alec Warner anta...@gentoo.org
wrote:
I think you will encounter namespace collisions, thats why I CC'd
zac as he maintains mirror-dist ;p
Why the hell didn't we think of this before!? :o
Uhm. We did. PMS is worded very carefully to ensure that this all
works. The only question is whether Portage's mirroring scripts are
broken. Alec seems to think they are; I'm sceptical, because a) I
pestered Zac about the issue really early on, and b) I strongly suspect
we'd've seen the breakage by now if they were.
I said I doubted they were and to ask the maintainer:
00:45 antarus zmedico: do the mirroring scripts do src_uri arrows properly?
00:46 zmedico antarus: yes
00:46 antarus ok super ;)
Thread Over ;)
The easiest solution I can think of is for emerge to give special
consideration to the mirrors in GENTOO_MIRRORS, and look for the
renamed file there instead of the original ones.
I quote:
In EAPIs supporting arrows, if an arrow is used, the filename used when
saving to \t{DISTDIR} shall instead be the name on the right of the
arrow. When consulting mirrors (except for those explicitly listed on
the left of the arrow, if \t{mirror://} is used), the filename to the
right of the arrow shall be requested instead of the filename in the
URI.
--
Ciaran McCreesh
Re: [gentoo-dev] perforce client proper license
On Saturday 21 March 2009, Markos Chandras wrote: Doing some research I found out that perforce-cli was in the portage back in 2006 but not anymore. Can somebody recall the reason why it is not there anymore? If it wasn't a license issue , I want to bring it back ( at least the client for now ). I am waiting your suggestions. Thank you Revisiting old bugs, it seems it was removed due to distfile collisions (same name, different content in several perforce packages): https://bugs.gentoo.org/123923 Since we have src_uri arrows now, this is no show-stopper. Robert signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] perforce client proper license
On Saturday 21 March 2009 14:50:08 Robert Buchholz wrote: On Saturday 21 March 2009, Markos Chandras wrote: Doing some research I found out that perforce-cli was in the portage back in 2006 but not anymore. Can somebody recall the reason why it is not there anymore? If it wasn't a license issue , I want to bring it back ( at least the client for now ). I am waiting your suggestions. Thank you Revisiting old bugs, it seems it was removed due to distfile collisions (same name, different content in several perforce packages): https://bugs.gentoo.org/123923 Since we have src_uri arrows now, this is no show-stopper. Robert Robert, I already used src_uri arrows on that ebuild. The thing is that I don't know how mirrors treat the arrows. Will mirrors save the file using the the normal filename or the one I specified on arrow? If the later, I need to have RESTRICT=nomirror or something. I took a look on EAPI2 specifications but couldn't find how mirrors behave with arrows. About the licensing issue, i think that the best is to make it dual license cause this is what I get by reading their site over and over again. If there are no objections, this package will be on tree withing the next 48 hours. Thanks - - Markos Chandras (hwoarang) Gentoo Linux Developer KDE/Qt/Sunrise/Sound Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.gr signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] perforce client proper license
Markos Chandras wrote: Hello folks, Qt-creator[1] program can support perforce[2] software configuration manager. My concern is the perforce license. According to their site[3] there is a dual(?) license. There is the standard commercial license[4] and one for free software development[4]. Should I add both? Or am I missing something? How about a single text file stating the main facts from [3] and [4]? Sebastian [3] http://www.perforce.com/perforce/price.html#license [4] http://www.perforce.com/perforce/price.html#opensource
Re: [gentoo-dev] perforce client proper license
On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:39:43 +0200
Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote:
I took a look on EAPI2 specifications but couldn't find how mirrors
behave with arrows.
It's supposed to say this:
In EAPIs supporting arrows, if an arrow is used, the filename used
when saving to \t{DISTDIR} shall instead be the name on the right of
the arrow. When consulting mirrors (except for those explicitly
listed on the left of the arrow, if \t{mirror://} is used), the
filename to the right of the arrow shall be requested instead of the
filename in the URI.
But it didn't, thanks to a formatting screwup. I've fixed that now.
--
Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] perforce client proper license
On Saturday 21 March 2009 15:46:19 Sebastian Pipping wrote: Markos Chandras wrote: Hello folks, Qt-creator[1] program can support perforce[2] software configuration manager. My concern is the perforce license. According to their site[3] there is a dual(?) license. There is the standard commercial license[4] and one for free software development[4]. Should I add both? Or am I missing something? How about a single text file stating the main facts from [3] and [4]? Sebastian [3] http://www.perforce.com/perforce/price.html#license [4] http://www.perforce.com/perforce/price.html#opensource Sebastian, Why would I want to do that? The license files should stay untouched. There is nothing wrong of having both licenses on ebuild since this is the upstream policy. -- Markos Chandras (hwoarang) Gentoo Linux Developer KDE/Qt/Sunrise/Sound Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.gr signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] perforce client proper license
Markos Chandras wrote: Sebastian, Why would I want to do that? The license files should stay untouched. There is nothing wrong of having both licenses on ebuild since this is the upstream policy. I forgot that the license files upstream might change so I agree you need a copy downstream. However, if the End User License Agreement for Open Source Software Development document alone doesn't say that 1) Perforce Software reserves the right to approve the Open Source license (from [4]) and 2) Execution of a End User License Agreement [..] is required (from [4]) (which at least I didn't find in the PDF) you will have to add that somewhere somehow because people could otherwise start using then software under that license without being permitted to. Also, please pay extra attention to the difference between the terms Open Source License and Open Source End User License Agreement. Thank you. Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-dev] perforce client proper license
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 7:11 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:39:43 +0200
Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote:
I took a look on EAPI2 specifications but couldn't find how mirrors
behave with arrows.
It's supposed to say this:
In EAPIs supporting arrows, if an arrow is used, the filename used
when saving to \t{DISTDIR} shall instead be the name on the right of
the arrow. When consulting mirrors (except for those explicitly
listed on the left of the arrow, if \t{mirror://} is used), the
filename to the right of the arrow shall be requested instead of the
filename in the URI.
But it didn't, thanks to a formatting screwup. I've fixed that now.
I think Markos is talking about the actual mirror-fetch script itself.
The gentoo mirrors still use a flat namespace so someone will need to
update mirror-fetch to rename files based on src_uri arrows. And by
'someone' I mean Zac.
-A
--
Ciaran McCreesh
Re: [gentoo-dev] perforce client proper license
On Saturday 21 March 2009 21:41:39 Alec Warner wrote:
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 7:11 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:39:43 +0200
Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote:
I took a look on EAPI2 specifications but couldn't find how mirrors
behave with arrows.
It's supposed to say this:
In EAPIs supporting arrows, if an arrow is used, the filename used
when saving to \t{DISTDIR} shall instead be the name on the right of
the arrow. When consulting mirrors (except for those explicitly
listed on the left of the arrow, if \t{mirror://} is used), the
filename to the right of the arrow shall be requested instead of the
filename in the URI.
But it didn't, thanks to a formatting screwup. I've fixed that now.
I think Markos is talking about the actual mirror-fetch script itself.
The gentoo mirrors still use a flat namespace so someone will need to
update mirror-fetch to rename files based on src_uri arrows. And by
'someone' I mean Zac.
-A
--
Ciaran McCreesh
Actually I didn't understand completely what Ciaran said. I am still
not
quite sure how mirrors treat the SRC_URI with arrows. Will they fetch the file
from upstream as save it with the filename I specified on arrow or they will
save it respecting the upstream filename? :)
--
Markos Chandras (hwoarang)
Gentoo Linux Developer
KDE/Qt/Sunrise/Sound
Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.gr
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] perforce client proper license
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Saturday 21 March 2009 21:41:39 Alec Warner wrote:
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 7:11 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:39:43 +0200
Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote:
I took a look on EAPI2 specifications but couldn't find how mirrors
behave with arrows.
It's supposed to say this:
In EAPIs supporting arrows, if an arrow is used, the filename used
when saving to \t{DISTDIR} shall instead be the name on the right of
the arrow. When consulting mirrors (except for those explicitly
listed on the left of the arrow, if \t{mirror://} is used), the
filename to the right of the arrow shall be requested instead of the
filename in the URI.
But it didn't, thanks to a formatting screwup. I've fixed that now.
I think Markos is talking about the actual mirror-fetch script itself.
The gentoo mirrors still use a flat namespace so someone will need to
update mirror-fetch to rename files based on src_uri arrows. And by
'someone' I mean Zac.
-A
--
Ciaran McCreesh
Actually I didn't understand completely what Ciaran said. I am still
not
quite sure how mirrors treat the SRC_URI with arrows. Will they fetch the file
from upstream as save it with the filename I specified on arrow or they will
save it respecting the upstream filename? :)
I think you will encounter namespace collisions, thats why I CC'd zac
as he maintains mirror-dist ;p
--
Markos Chandras (hwoarang)
Gentoo Linux Developer
KDE/Qt/Sunrise/Sound
Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.gr
