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. https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/openSUSE:Tools/build 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: https://github.com/openSUSE/obs-build/issues/133
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 0~git<date>.<build-on-that-day>.<commit-hash>-<debrevision>. 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 isNo, 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... Greets, Mike -- DAS-NETZWERKTEAM mike gabriel, herweg 7, 24357 fleckeby fon: +49 (1520) 1976 148 GnuPG Key ID 0x25771B31 mail: mike.gabr...@das-netzwerkteam.de, http://das-netzwerkteam.de freeBusy: https://mail.das-netzwerkteam.de/freebusy/m.gabriel%40das-netzwerkteam.de.xfb
pgpZbK8dl1Un1.pgp
Description: Digitale PGP-Signatur
