Re: Debian Perl Group meeting at DebCamp - 2008-08-06
Damyan Ivanov dijo [Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 05:56:43PM +0300]:
> > > > > > When: Wednesday, 2008-08-06, 11:00 (UTC-3)
> > > > > > Where: Salón de Mar ("larger talk room", 7th floor)
> > > > > And the meeting has happened!
> > > https://gallery.debconf.org/v/debconf8/gwolf/080820081028.jpg.html
> >
> > Nice picture, but that's the openmoko-bof :)
> > (Although the place is the same)
>
> Eh, I followed Gunnar's titles :) Perhaps some the previous picture in
> the gallery is indeed from the pkg-perl meeting. Not critical anyway
> :)
Oops! /me corrects gallery. Of course, I could not have taken our
pictures, as I was too busy transcribing ;-)
> > Therefore a unique id (like dh-make-perl version or svn revision)
> > might be easier.
>
> Thought about this, but the checksum serves one very important
> function -- one can check whether the rules file was hand-modified, or
> is it the same generated version and can safely be re-generated.
Both checks can be added. Just adding the dh-make-perl revision to the
file's header, will allow us to quickly identify it visually (and
probably hint any hypothetical updating tool on whether the file in
question deserves consideration for a given process). And checking
against the MD5 will allow for much better automated updates
repo-wide.
> I meant something like this:
>
> #!/usr/bin/make -f
> # Generated-Content-SHA1: 1234567890deadbeef
> ... content follows ...
>
> with the checksum made only for the content *after* the
> Generated-Content-SHA1 line, thus not including it and solving the
> chicken-and-egg problem.
Yup - Just add before your header (and probably before the
computation):
dh-make-perl: v0.48
> I see. While I think the Copyright: part may work, the License may be
> tricky. Not only because the "superset" may ot be that clear, but also
> because there if upstream changes their license, that would mean that
> all contributors automatically change the license of their work.
> Smells bad to me :)
No, the check is done only at the first build - when the files are
laid out. Upstream cannot relicense our code - And the chosen
licensing for our packaging is just a suggestion kindly made by
dh-make-perl. We added the GPL2+ and Artistic license to keep all of
our work interchangeable.
> My reason is more my dee[er than expected involvment with the
> DebianEeePC project. Hopefully we'll fix everything that needs fixing
> and I'll use the nice toy for more pkg-perl work. :)
OT: I'm more than delighted with my AcerAspireOne. There was
practically no hacking involved in getting everything recognized by a
standard Lenny (well, that can also be seen as a turnoff ;-) ). Why is
the Eee problematic? (feel free to reply off-list or not to reply, or
whatnot)
Greetings,
--
Gunnar Wolf - gwolf@gwolf.org - (+52-55)5623-0154 / 1451-2244
PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23
Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973 F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF
Reply to: