On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 18:44:18 -0700
Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 05:38:59PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 11:54:04 -0700
> Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > Github has changed this several times :-( if the old url scheme
> > is not working any longer the guidelines should be updated. Fpc
> > ticket is probably best for that. From your description of what
> > urls work, I'm not sure if there's a good recommendation for a
> > github url in source0 (have to test the permutations to see).
> > Might have to go back to putting the url in a comment.
>
> I tried a few permutations and none with $PROJECT-%{commit}.tar.gz
> worked ...
>
> What should be put in the fpc ticket ?
>
The format that helps the FPC the most is to copy the existing
guideline (or section if it's just a portion) into a fresh wiki page,
submit. Then make proposed changes and commit. When you're happy
with it, open an FPC ticket that points to the page and also lists
the important facts that you've discovered about why the change needs
to be made (in this case, that the present URL scheme no longer works
and that there doesn't appear to be any nice replacement).
If $PROJECT-%{commit}.tar.gz no longer works, I'd probably say that
downloading using wget or curl to ${PROJECT}-%{commit}.tar.gz and then
listing the url to use in a spec file comment is the way to go. An
alternative is to use the %{commit}.tar.gz url in the Source0 but the
headers pose their own technical problem there and having a bunch of
tarballs with simply commit hashes as names is less than ideal from a
human readable standpoint.
I'm no longer on the FPC so it'll be up to you and the present FPC
members to decide what alternative to go with.
Well I am no expert and I am not sure what to do here.
Can someone else chime in ?
What would you do ?
The comment route looks as good as any other to me...
Simo.
--
Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York