[Fedora-packaging] DRAFT: SourceURL addition/clarification - Git Hosting Services
Gerald B. Cox
gbcox at bzb.us
Fri Jun 26 15:47:33 UTC 2015
Remi,
Thanks so much for taking the time to comment.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 7:44 AM, Remi Collet <Fedora at famillecollet.com>
wrote:
> I strongly believe the "commit hash" method should be preferred as in
> the current Guidelines (and obviously not a "last solution")
>
> The order that a method appears doesn't denote a preference in and of
itself.
Please help me understand something. Why are you so concerned about the
use of Git Tags? I have included text which clearly states that if the
packager
believes that re-tagging is being used, he MUST follow a specific procedure
to resolve that issue. If there is a problem with the archive the checksum
won't match. What is the harm if we later find that upstream did re-tag?
The archive with the embedded commit information is already in the srpm.
The act of re-tagging can't change that. We always know the commit hash
version of that archive.
> About the "Git Submodules",
> I think this is directly conflicting with the "no bundled" Guidelines.
>
The fact that upstream uses the submodule capability doesn't mean that
the code within that submodule is a bundled library. If it is found to be,
then
of course the "No Bundled Libraries" guideline would apply.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/attachments/20150626/69dc3ede/attachment.html>
More information about the packaging
mailing list