On 07/31/2009 01:48 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 01:09:43PM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-08-01 at 01:20 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> That's kind of side tracking though. Point is that SRPM as upstream
>> source is simply a stupid thing. We would complain loudly or atleast
>> whine about it if Novell or Mandriva or Debian did that. Wouldn't we?
>>
>> Why should we have an exception anymore? I can't think of a single
>> reason why we should.
>>
>
> If there was no public available source repo, yes we'd complain. If
> there was, I don't think we'd complain really.
We don't complain about no public source repo. See deltarpm. It's
"repo"
consists of the tarball we use already. It doesn't even have an easily
findable project website.
We're supposed to. The review for deltarpm says that the reviewer
checked the tarball against upstream:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=202033
This is what's in the current spec:
"""
URL:
http://gitorious.org/deltarpm/deltarpm
Source: %{name}-git-20090729.tar.bz2
"""
This doesn't follow the Guidelines but doesn't look as bad as you say.
There is a public source repo on gitorious. jdieter has commit access
there. It seems like all that's needed is the comment that says:
# Generate source by doing:
# git clone -r FFFFFFFFFF
http://gitorious.org/deltarpm/deltarpm
# tar -czf deltrpm-%{version}.tar.gz deltarpm
-Toshio