[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#764567: ITP: obs-build -- Build DEB/RPM packages for various distributions inside a chroot

Hi Dimitri,

On  Do 09 Okt 2014 11:55:00 CEST, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:

What concerns me most about your upload is the version number.

Yeah, I am aware of the crazy version numbering. So I based my version
numbers, on the version numbers that are published and used by
openSUSE itself in the openSUSE:Tools repository.
Which is where they package up daily git snapshot when a "release" happens.

So At the moment, I have exact same version as the upstream "releases"
are in the openSUSE:Tools repository. Why should version numbers
diverge from what's used in openSUSE and upstream?

Ich kann nur ein bistchen Deutsch sprechen.... I did request tags for
matching builds to be pushed into the repository, but it doesn't look
like github issues are being monitored:

I pinged Michael Schroeder on IRC. I'll send you his nick off-list.

I understand that there are tags on the openSUSE/obs-build.git. I used them
as well till yesterday. However, I had an intensive chat with one of the
upstream authors (Michael Schroeder, from SUSE) yesterday. Unfortunately in
German, so copy+pasting makes no sense here.

About the tags on the Git he said: those tags are actually obs-server tags
(not obs-build). The obs-server devs tagged obs-build with obs-server
versions, so that they know what obs-build version / Git commit hash was
used with what obs-server version.

About obs-build, he said: every commit is a release. So basically, we should
use the version date. With upstream I came to the conclustion that the best
version number would be

So, the question is, if you are open do re-upload obs-build. If so, we
should merge our packaging efforts (I think) and get several other things
going (e.g. the initvm.c tool, tests, etc.).

Also, I could not really find that all files are licensed GPL-2+. I just
asked upstream to do that today [1].

I went by the license information used by OBS packagers in
openSUSE:Tools repository which states GPL-2+. More explicit licensing
info would be appreciated in the repository itself. Thanks for asking
and getting that changed.

Ah. OK. Good point. This really needs to be reflected in upstream Git.

Do i need to join irc and ping adrian to get this reviewed/merged
https://github.com/openSUSE/obs-build/pull/136 ?

I am not aware of a public channel where to grab those SUSE devs. The two us meeting up on debian-devel is an idea. I won't be available till tonight, though.

Actually, some files [2] are licensed as GPL-3+, so your copyright file is

No, it got changed to "2 or 3", but no later. Given that some other
files are GPL-2-only, it seems like overall it's GPL-2-only.

Ah, ok... Read over the license change commits to quickly then...



mike gabriel, herweg 7, 24357 fleckeby
fon: +49 (1520) 1976 148

GnuPG Key ID 0x25771B31
mail: mike.gabriel@das-netzwerkteam.de, http://das-netzwerkteam.de


Attachment: pgpad6wmZHQX_.pgp
Description: Digitale PGP-Signatur

Reply to: