No.

I just want to know if this way is allowed.

On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Matthias Runge mrunge@matthias-runge.de wrote:

Does this answer your question now?

Let me speak more clearly.

Now the GitHub SourceURL guidelines[1] said:

"For the source tarball, you should use this syntax:

https://github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/archive/%%7Bcommit%7D/%%7Bname%7D-%%7Bver..."

Well, each time I have to %global %{commit} and {shortcommit}, I think it's boring.

Now looking at:

https://github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/tags

If the author has tagged the release, GitHub will offer each tag with 3 links: Zipball URL/ Tarball URL and a link to the commit of this tag.

I only discuss tarball, tarball offers this URL:

https://github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/archive/%%7Bversion%7D.tar.gz

So my question is that can we use this URL as the Source0 instead of the guidelines said?

Thanks.

[1]----https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Github

Hello Christopher, hello list!

Am Donnerstag, den 30.05.2013, 16:49 +0800 schrieb Christopher Meng:

On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Matthias Runge mrunge@matthias-runge.de wrote:

...

Does this answer your question now?

Let me speak more clearly.

Now the GitHub SourceURL guidelines[1] said:

"For the source tarball, you should use this syntax:

https://github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/archive/%%7Bcommit%7D/%%7Bname%7D-%%7Bver..."

Guidelines are made to tell you the way how things are done, aren't they? This syntax is the only sane way to have a SOURCE which can be recreated randomly and verified to be pristine.

Well, each time I have to %global %{commit} and {shortcommit}, I think it's boring.

Doing this bit of copy-paste when altering %{version}, %{release} and %changelog can't be this hard. You'll need %{commit} during %prep anyways. Even when using https://github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/archive/%%7Bversion%7D.tar.gz. Or ask upstream to provide tar.{bz2,xz} downloads somewhere else...

Now looking at:

https://github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/tags

If the author has tagged the release, GitHub will offer each tag with 3 links: Zipball URL/ Tarball URL and a link to the commit of this tag.

I only discuss tarball, tarball offers this URL:

https://github.com/$OWNER/$PROJECT/archive/%%7Bversion%7D.tar.gz

So my question is that can we use this URL as the Source0 instead of the guidelines said?

I'd say "NO WAY", because tags can be created/deleted/altered by anyone having write-access to the repo. They are NOT explicitly meant to be created-once-lasts-forever or points-to-same-commit-sha-forever, so checking the tarball to be pristine might be close to impossible in the future, if the tag will be altered pointing to an other commit or be deleted. This may lead to FTBFS as well. An URL like this also _WILL_ lead to conflicting names of source-tarballs, because it's only named to the version and not to the app's name. Don't forget the naming guidelines: "When naming a package, the name should match the upstream tarball or project..."

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/Namin...

So using the URL from the guidelines all will be fine, because it will create a tarball named containing the projectname, version and the definitive unique and forever-lasting commit-sha...

Thanks.

You're welcome!

[1]----https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Github

Cheers, Björn

tor 2013-05-30 klockan 11:51 +0200 skrev Björn Esser:

I'd say "NO WAY", because tags can be created/deleted/altered by anyone having write-access to the repo. They are NOT explicitly meant to be created-once-lasts-forever or points-to-same-commit-sha-forever, so checking the tarball to be pristine might be close to impossible in the future, if the tag will be altered pointing to an other commit or be deleted. This may lead to FTBFS as well. An URL like this also _WILL_ lead to conflicting names of source-tarballs, because it's only named to the version and not to the app's name. Don't forget the naming guidelines: "When naming a package, the name should match the upstream tarball or project..."

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/Namin...

So using the URL from the guidelines all will be fine, because it will create a tarball named containing the projectname, version and the definitive unique and forever-lasting commit-sha...

Why is a tarball published on github less valuable than a tarball published anywhere else?

Admittedly, as you say a tag in github can be removed and reapplied again on a different commit. However, a well behaving upstream will not do this. This is not something unique to github - the same can happen on a git server somewhere else and in svn and cvs too. Also a tarball published by upstream on a separate server can be replaced with a different one if upstream is not well behaved. If you do not accept the tarball generated from the github tag published on the github server, why would you accept any source tarball published anywhere? They both can be replaced at any time by a weirdly behaving upstream. And neither will be replaced by a well behaving one.

Mattias

Hi all again.

Now I have a package wemux[1], from tags[2] you can only see 2.2.0 version.

However, in the download center[3] of this project, we can found a newer version: 3.1.0.

So in this case what should I do?

Thanks.

[1]----https://github.com/zolrath/wemux [2]----https://github.com/zolrath/wemux/tags [3]----https://github.com/zolrath/wemux/downloads