[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: RFC: Exploded source repo layouts

I am not think the debian borg are crazy because they  have svn-buildpackage, cvs-buildpackage, git-buildpackage
from years(http://honk.sigxcpu.org/projects/git-buildpackage/manual-html/gbp.html). Doesn't exists a rpm equivalent - or
better an rpmbuild integration with vcs - only because of rpm fragmentation and, i think, because every other distro want a
competive advantage in using the their "buildsystem". But, in 2008, it is time to gave to all the rpm packager an unified vcs integration with RPM


On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 9:43 AM, Hans de Goede <j w r degoede hhs nl> wrote:
Doug Ledford wrote:
I've been working on getting this set up and functional.

<lots of complicated hacks and workarounds deleted>

So Far I've been quiet on this, sort of hoping it would go away by itself, but as a contributor with quite a few packages let me say that I'm deeply worried about this whole distributed VCS / exploded source idea floating around.

It seems there are a few people who are a big fan of this, and about as much active opponents. I have no problems with adding the possibility to use a distributed VCS with exploded trees to the mix of ways to maintain and build packages, but this should not replace the current nice and simple setup we have.

First of all it does NOT match the way rpm was designed at all, rpm is about pristine sources with _separate_ patches, but most importantly, this is rather complicated making things unnecessary hard for people who don't want to do the stuff some of the distributed VCS proponents want to do. This worries me, I'm esp. worried that the barrier of entry to becoming a Fedora packager will be raised significantly.

Also I even fail to see the claimed advantages in using a distributed VCS at all, isn't our mantra upstream upstream upstream, well if this mantra is properly followed and upstream is undergoing active development then most of the time the pristine sources should be fine without any patches at all, since all patches are integrated upstream in a timely manner. Also if someone wants to do so much work on the upstrewam sources, then he/she should just become an upstream developer. Really getting upstream cvs/svn/whatever access isn't that hard, then one can directly commit one's changes in to upstreams VCS.



fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list redhat com

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]