Source0 for github ?

[Simo Sorce]

I was looking at this:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL?rd=Packaging/SourceURL...

But it doesn't look like the URL constructed with these instructions
lead to a download-able tarball.
I guess Github has changed things again, is there any new guideline for
Github Sources ?

What I can see is that while this:
https://github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/archive/%{commit}/$PROJECT-%{commit}.t...
does not work, this:
https://github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/archive/%{commit}.tar.gz
works, and the content headers tell the browser that the file name
should be $PROJECT-%{commit}.tar.gz

Any direction would be appreciated.

Simo.


-- 
Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York

[Simo Sorce]

On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 14:07:20 -0400
Simo Sorce <ssorce(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:

>  
>  I was looking at this:
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL?rd=Packaging/SourceURL...
>  
>  But it doesn't look like the URL constructed with these instructions
>  lead to a download-able tarball.
>  I guess Github has changed things again, is there any new guideline
>  for Github Sources ?
>  
>  What I can see is that while this:
>  https://github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/archive/%{commit}/$PROJECT-%{commit}.t...
>  does not work, this:
>  https://github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/archive/%{commit}.tar.gz
>  works, and the content headers tell the browser that the file name
>  should be $PROJECT-%{commit}.tar.gz
>  
>  Any direction would be appreciated. 
Also FWIW https://github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/archive/%{commit}.tar.gz
gives a 302 and redirects to:
https://codeload.github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/tar.gz/%{commit}

The Content-Disposition header then is:
"attachment; filename=$PROJECT-%{commit}.tar.gz"

Simo.

-- 
Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Sep 17, 2014 11:07 AM, "Simo Sorce" <ssorce(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  I was looking at this:
>  
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL?rd=Packaging/SourceURL...
>  But it doesn't look like the URL constructed with these instructions
>  lead to a download-able tarball.
>  I guess Github has changed things again, is there any new guideline for
>  Github Sources ?
>
>  What I can see is that while this:
>  
https://github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/archive/%{commit}/$PROJECT-%{commit}.t...
>  does not work, this:
>  https://github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/archive/%{commit}.tar.gz
>  works, and the content headers tell the browser that the file name
>  should be $PROJECT-%{commit}.tar.gz
>
>  Any direction would be appreciated.
>  
Github has changed this several times :-(  if the old url scheme is not
working any longer the guidelines should be updated.  Fpc ticket is
probably best for that.  From your description of what urls work, I'm not
sure if there's a good recommendation for a github url in source0 (have to
test the permutations to see). Might have to go back to putting the url in
a comment.

-Toshio

[Simo Sorce]

On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 11:54:04 -0700
Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  On Sep 17, 2014 11:07 AM, "Simo Sorce"
> <ssorce(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  >
>  >
>  > I was looking at this:
>  >
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL?rd=Packaging/SourceURL...
>  >
>  > But it doesn't look like the URL constructed with these instructions
>  > lead to a download-able tarball.
>  > I guess Github has changed things again, is there any new guideline
>  > for Github Sources ?
>  >
>  > What I can see is that while this:
>  >
>  https://github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/archive/%{commit}/$PROJECT-%{commit}.t...
>  > does not work, this:
>  > https://github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/archive/%{commit}.tar.gz
>  > works, and the content headers tell the browser that the file name
>  > should be $PROJECT-%{commit}.tar.gz
>  >
>  > Any direction would be appreciated.
>  >
>  Github has changed this several times :-(  if the old url scheme is
>  not working any longer the guidelines should be updated.  Fpc ticket
>  is probably best for that.  From your description of what urls work,
>  I'm not sure if there's a good recommendation for a github url in
>  source0 (have to test the permutations to see). Might have to go back
>  to putting the url in a comment. 
I tried a few permutations and none with $PROJECT-%{commit}.tar.gz
worked ...

What should be put in the fpc ticket ?

Simo.

(sorry for the dup Toshio, I am resending with the address subscribed
to the list)
-- 
Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 05:38:59PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
>  On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 11:54:04 -0700
>  Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  > >
>  > Github has changed this several times :-(  if the old url scheme is
>  > not working any longer the guidelines should be updated.  Fpc ticket
>  > is probably best for that.  From your description of what urls work,
>  > I'm not sure if there's a good recommendation for a github url in
>  > source0 (have to test the permutations to see). Might have to go back
>  > to putting the url in a comment.
>  
>  I tried a few permutations and none with $PROJECT-%{commit}.tar.gz
>  worked ...
>  
>  What should be put in the fpc ticket ?
>   
The format that helps the FPC the most is to copy the existing guideline (or
section if it's just a portion) into a fresh wiki page, submit.  Then make
proposed changes and commit.  When you're happy with it, open an FPC ticket
that points to the page and also lists the important facts that you've
discovered about why the change needs to be made (in this case, that the
present URL scheme no longer works and that there doesn't appear to be any
nice replacement).

If $PROJECT-%{commit}.tar.gz no longer works, I'd probably say that
downloading using wget or curl to ${PROJECT}-%{commit}.tar.gz and then
listing the url to use in a spec file comment is the way to go.  An
alternative is to use the %{commit}.tar.gz url in the Source0 but the
headers pose their own technical problem there and having a bunch of
tarballs with simply commit hashes as names is less than ideal from a human
readable standpoint.

I'm no longer on the FPC so it'll be up to you and the present FPC members
to decide what alternative to go with.

-Toshio

[Simo Sorce]

On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 18:44:18 -0700
Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 05:38:59PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
>  > On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 11:54:04 -0700
>  > Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  > > >
>  > > Github has changed this several times :-(  if the old url scheme
>  > > is not working any longer the guidelines should be updated.  Fpc
>  > > ticket is probably best for that.  From your description of what
>  > > urls work, I'm not sure if there's a good recommendation for a
>  > > github url in source0 (have to test the permutations to see).
>  > > Might have to go back to putting the url in a comment.
>  > 
>  > I tried a few permutations and none with $PROJECT-%{commit}.tar.gz
>  > worked ...
>  > 
>  > What should be put in the fpc ticket ?
>  > 
>  The format that helps the FPC the most is to copy the existing
>  guideline (or section if it's just a portion) into a fresh wiki page,
>  submit.  Then make proposed changes and commit.  When you're happy
>  with it, open an FPC ticket that points to the page and also lists
>  the important facts that you've discovered about why the change needs
>  to be made (in this case, that the present URL scheme no longer works
>  and that there doesn't appear to be any nice replacement).
>  
>  If $PROJECT-%{commit}.tar.gz no longer works, I'd probably say that
>  downloading using wget or curl to ${PROJECT}-%{commit}.tar.gz and then
>  listing the url to use in a spec file comment is the way to go.  An
>  alternative is to use the %{commit}.tar.gz url in the Source0 but the
>  headers pose their own technical problem there and having a bunch of
>  tarballs with simply commit hashes as names is less than ideal from a
>  human readable standpoint.
>  
>  I'm no longer on the FPC so it'll be up to you and the present FPC
>  members to decide what alternative to go with. 
Well I am no expert and I am not sure what to do here.
Can someone else chime in ?

What would you do ?
The comment route looks as good as any other to me...

Simo.



-- 
Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York

[Orion Poplawski]

On 09/17/2014 12:07 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
>  I was looking at this:
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL?rd=Packaging/SourceURL...
>
>  But it doesn't look like the URL constructed with these instructions
>  lead to a download-able tarball.
>  I guess Github has changed things again, is there any new guideline for
>  Github Sources ?
>
>  What I can see is that while this:
>  https://github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/archive/%{commit}/$PROJECT-%{commit}.t...
>  does not work, this:
>  https://github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/archive/%{commit}.tar.gz
>  works, and the content headers tell the browser that the file name
>  should be $PROJECT-%{commit}.tar.gz
>
>  Any direction would be appreciated.
>
>  Simo.
>
>  
Has anyone talked to github about it?

-- 
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager                     303-415-9701 x222
NWRA/CoRA Division                    FAX: [phone]
3380 Mitchell Lane                  orion(a)cora.nwra.com
Boulder, CO 80301              http://www.cora.nwra.com

[Simo Sorce]

On Thu, 18 Sep 2014 21:37:39 -0600
Orion Poplawski <orion(a)cora.nwra.com&gt; wrote:

>  On 09/17/2014 12:07 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
>  >
>  > I was looking at this:
>  > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL?rd=Packaging/SourceURL...
>  >
>  > But it doesn't look like the URL constructed with these instructions
>  > lead to a download-able tarball.
>  > I guess Github has changed things again, is there any new guideline
>  > for Github Sources ?
>  >
>  > What I can see is that while this:
>  > https://github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/archive/%{commit}/$PROJECT-%{commit}.t...
>  > does not work, this:
>  > https://github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/archive/%{commit}.tar.gz
>  > works, and the content headers tell the browser that the file name
>  > should be $PROJECT-%{commit}.tar.gz
>  >
>  > Any direction would be appreciated.
>  >
>  > Simo.
>  >
>  >
>  
>  Has anyone talked to github about it?
>   
I have no contacts there and just looking for guidance.

Simo.

-- 
Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York

[Jeff Backus]

On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 03:57:26PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2014 21:37:39 -0600
> Orion Poplawski <orion(a)cora.nwra.com&gt; wrote:
>
> > On 09/17/2014 12:07 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > >
> > > What I can see is that while this:
> > > https://github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/archive/%{commit}/$PROJECT-%{commit}.t...
> > > does not work, this:
> > > https://github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/archive/%{commit}.tar.gz
> > > works, and the content headers tell the browser that the file name
> > > should be $PROJECT-%{commit}.tar.gz
> > >
> >
> > Has anyone talked to github about it?
> >
>
> I have no contacts there and just looking for guidance.
>
> Simo.
>  
Hi Simo,

Yesterday afternoon, the first form works for me. Verified again today.  
Actually, first time I tried it yesterday it didn't work, but then 
started working. So maybe one of the fine folks at GitHub fixed it 
yesterday? Dunno. Maybe give it another try?

Regards,
Jeff

-- 
Jeff Backus
jeff.backus(a)gmail.com
http://github.com/jsbackus

[Simo Sorce]

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 18:08:51 -0400
Jeff Backus <jeff.backus(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 03:57:26PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
>  >On Thu, 18 Sep 2014 21:37:39 -0600
>  >Orion Poplawski <orion(a)cora.nwra.com&gt; wrote:
>  >
>  >> On 09/17/2014 12:07 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
>  >> >
>  >> > What I can see is that while this:
>  >> >
> https://github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/archive/%{commit}/$PROJECT-%{commit}.t...
>  >> > does not work, this:
>  >> > https://github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/archive/%{commit}.tar.gz
>  >> > works, and the content headers tell the browser that the file
>  >> > name should be $PROJECT-%{commit}.tar.gz
>  >> >
>  >>
>  >> Has anyone talked to github about it?
>  >>
>  >
>  >I have no contacts there and just looking for guidance.
>  >
>  >Simo.
>  >
>  
>  Hi Simo,
>  
>  Yesterday afternoon, the first form works for me. Verified again
>  today. Actually, first time I tried it yesterday it didn't work, but
>  then started working. So maybe one of the fine folks at GitHub fixed
>  it yesterday? Dunno. Maybe give it another try?
>  
>  Regards,
>  Jeff 
Jeff,
interesting, I used a different commit id today and it works.
However if I use the instructions on the page to get the right commit
it doesn't.

Ie if I use git rev-parse $TAG I get a commit id which will not work
when substituted above. Intead if I do git log -1 $TAG and use the
commit id of the tagged commit it works.
I wonder if the instructions have always been wrong or if they change
something subtler in github and now only the tag ids do not work
anymore ...

Simo.

-- 
Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York