Alek Paunov alex at
Wed Nov 27 18:47:49 UTC 2013

Hi Tako,

On 27.11.2013 15:01, Tako Schotanus wrote:
> Sorry for not responding to this before, but lots of other things to do and this packaging business obviously needs more than just an hour here or there of reading READMEs.

NP, I just decided that you are in touch with the experienced packages 
who already offered to help/mentor the Ceylon stack packaging and they 
have guided you to some better workspace/workflow.

> I see you want to make things even more difficult for me by giving me *several* options to choose from, are you *trying* to torture me? ;)
> Is there somewhere I can read up on this way of managing packages?

No. Perhaps the LuaJIT Fedora stack will be prepared/supported by the 
Lua community in that fashion, but it is just a plan at this time.

> And any particular reason why you would suggest making a new gitgub project for each of the Ceylon SPEC files instead of just putting them together? Wouldn't that just give us a bunch of 1-file projects otherwise?

The intention is, the staged package repos to be in same shape as 
production repos:

i.e. one repo/SRPM per source based build (as Dridi emphasized in the 
previous mail, probably somewhere grouping tarballs (tar.gz) from more 
than one gh:ceylon/* repos) where latter build BuildRequires result RPMs 
from the previous or the Fedora NN platform resource (e.g. eclipse RPMs) 
containing same _fixed_ branches as the dist-git repos:

To be persistent with the torture and complications :-), I would suggest 
you to additionally:

- Create one top repo with the same branches (f21, f20, f19, etc):
       - submodule: ceylon
         ref: gh:fstack-ceylon/ceylon
       - submodule: ecliplse-ceylon-ide
         ref: gh:fstack-ceylon/ecliplse-ceylon-ide

       - ceylon.spec

       - 0001-tweaks-for-eclipse-xxx-c1.patch
       - 0002-tweaks-for-yyy.patch
       - ecliplse-ceylon-ide.spec

   That way, you could deal with the whole stack, 
clonning/barnch-switching single fstack-ceylon repo (as you like in the 
question above), still keeping the (real) sub-repos dist-git ready.

- When somewhere the need of patching arises (e.g. because of 
incompatibility between the base ceylon-something version for that dist 
branch e.g. f19 and the required platform components e.g. eclipse-xxx in 
f19) you can add "f19" branch directly in the respective 
gh:ceylon/something repo e.g. gh:ceylon/ceylon-ide-eclipse and then 
easily produce the required patches to the 
gh:fstack-ceylon/ecliplse-ceylon-ide in f19 branch, with git 
format-patch, see libguestfs:

Kind Regards,


> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alek Paunov" <alex at>
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" <devel at>
> Cc: "Tako Schotanus" <tschotan at>
> Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 5:54:53 PM
> Subject: Re: Introduction
> On 22.11.2013 14:58, Tako Schotanus wrote:
>> So I'm completely new to this packaging business, I managed to piece together a SPEC file that results in an actually working RPM for our project and even Koji seems to accept it, but there's so much information to absorb that I'm feeling a bit out of my depth. (Our project being a programming language we're dealing with some difficult issues with respect to versioning and such, for now I've copied Java's with alternatives and such which might or not be a good idea). So if there are some friendly people here that can guide me through my first real submission that would be great!
> I really don't know weather this idea is appropriate [*], but since
> Ceylon development is github based anyway and Ceylon is a fresh new
> development stack (according to terminology :-) ), what
> about new github account: fstack-ceylon (Ceylon related packages for
> Fedora) containing something like:
> gh:fstack-ceylon/ceylon/ceylon.spec
> gh:fstack-ceylon/ecliplse-ceylon-ide/ecliplse-ceylon-ide.spec
> ... etc
> formed in the same shape as the future dist-git repos (being drafts for
> them) for all the incoming Ceylon SRPMs.
> You could then clone/commit there your current .spec drafts and receive
> issues and pull requests containing packages improvements (e.g. with
> pointers to relevant guidelines parts) if it turns out that such style
> of community work on the specs seems efficient to the established
> packagers, who already offered help.
> I imagine few additional pros:
> - Ceylon stack packaging "story" collected under a github account can
> become a visible guide for the new stacks Fedora integration (especially
> for the potential contributors which are new to the tracking of the
> bugzilla.rh packaging bugs and the other Fedora communication channels).
> - the whole collection of the specs, when polished could be forked and
> tweaked for other RPM based distributions.
> Kind Regards,
> Alek
> [*] because 1) it seems that few voices are firmly against Fedora
> specific work on github and 2) this would lead to some bug-tracking
> fragmentation between github/bugzilla, but I hope the latter is more
> technical (synchronization/indexing) issue.

More information about the devel mailing list