[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