Hi,
Maybe we should add guidelines for bitbucket. That could be very
similar to github's template:
===
%global owner $OWNER
%global tag $TAG
%global commit $COMMIT
%global shortcommit %(c=%{commit}; echo ${c:0:12})
...
Source0:
https://bitbucket.org/%{owner}/%{name}/get/%{tag}.tar.gz
...
%prep
%setup -qn %{owner}-%{name}-%{shortcommit}
===
I have tested this sucessfully with one (mercurial) package where $TAG
is %{version}.
What do you think ?
Dridi
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Sandro Mani <manisandro(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 26.02.2014 10:16, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
>
> Hello,
> I've submitted a while ago a review-request on a package [0] that is
> taken from
bitbucket.org. Unfortunately there was no reviewer yet, and I
> suspect that is because unlike github [1] we have no rules on how to
> handle bitbucket. Have other packagers experienced something similar in
> other software? Is there a "good" way to handle repository-distributed
> software? As it is now in [0] I've tried to simulate the github rules on
> bitbucket.
>
> regards,
> Nikos
>
>
> [0].
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282
> [1].
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Github
>
>
FWIW, this is how eigen does it:
# Source file is at:
http://bitbucket.org/eigen/eigen/get/3.1.3.tar.bz2
# Renamed source file so it's not just a version number
Source0: eigen-%{version}.tar.bz2
Sandro
--
devel mailing list
devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct:
http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct