On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 02:21:36PM +0100, Ralf Lang wrote:

Am Montag 31 Januar 2011, 13:09:55 schrieb Stephan Kulow:

...

Hi,

We would like to release RC1 next week, but the current state of factory doesn't really make this obvious ;(

There are tons of packages either failing to build or have unsubmitted changes in their devel projects or (even worse) have submits pending to their devel projects.

Please everyone, check http://bit.ly/h6qHlO and look out for your projects and packages.

Greetings, Stephan

I'm a little bit confused now. I just checked https://build.opensuse.org/project/packages?package=&project=openSUSE%3AFactory and found virtually no php pear library packages in the factory (with about 30 pear packages of mine in queue for submission). Didn't I get some change of policy or is this really the current state? Are users expected to include server:php:application per default if they use PHP stuff?

How can I verify I have all dependencies of dependencies already submitted? Is there any tool?

The pear packages are waiting for license review. The first time inclusion packages are not in coolos List. Ciao, Marcus -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org

On 31/01/11 15:35, Stephan Kulow wrote:

...

...

Please everyone, check http://bit.ly/h6qHlO and look out for your projects

Having a real URL would be much nicer than some you-don't-know-where-it-leads URL.

I do that with URLs < 70 chars :)

You can have a short URL and at the same time know where it leads to: http://bit.ly/factory-status -- Best Regards / S pozdravom, Pavol RUSNAK SUSE LINUX, s.r.o openSUSE Boosters Team Lihovarska 1060/12 PGP 0xA6917144 19000 Praha 9 prusnak[at]opensuse.org Czech Republic -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org

On 31/01/11 16:12, Stephan Kulow wrote:

Am Montag, 31. Januar 2011 schrieb Pavol Rusnak:

...

On 31/01/11 15:35, Stephan Kulow wrote:

...

...

...

Please everyone, check http://bit.ly/h6qHlO and look out for your projects

Having a real URL would be much nicer than some you-don't-know-where-it-leads URL.

I do that with URLs < 70 chars :)

You can have a short URL and at the same time know where it leads to:

http://bit.ly/factory-status I guess this requires a login? I use a firefox addon to shorten.

Yes, bit.ly requires login to customize short URLs, but for instance is.gd does not (if your firefox addon supports this shortener). -- Best Regards / S pozdravom, Pavol RUSNAK SUSE LINUX, s.r.o openSUSE Boosters Team Lihovarska 1060/12 PGP 0xA6917144 19000 Praha 9 prusnak[at]opensuse.org Czech Republic -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org

On Monday 31 January 2011 15:23:23 Stefan Seyfried wrote:

On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 13:09:55 +0100

Stephan Kulow wrote:

...

There are tons of packages either failing to build or have unsubmitted changes in their devel projects or (even worse) have submits pending to their devel projects.

Linphone in the devel project has the problem, that apparently people are not happy with my patch (see https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=664808). This is why I did not yet submit it. (The current version in oS:F just segfaults on an incoming call, which is of course aesthetically much more pleasing ;)

Therefore I've submitted 'yate', a Qt4-based SIP-client that actually doesn't crash (like Ekiga or linphone or sflphone-client-kde). -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Sascha Peilicke http://saschpe.wordpress.com

Hello, on Dienstag, 1. Februar 2011, Stephan Kulow wrote:

On Monday 31 January 2011 22:48:13 Christian Boltz wrote:

...

- please reconsider if this header makes sense nowadays. Given the fact that several packages are completely maintained by community members not employed by Novell/SUSE, I somehow doubt...

It's impossible to have files without copyright headers and if there are none, we put the default copyright in place.

So if I put in something like ---------------------------------- (c) Christian Boltz 2010-2011 This spec file is licensed under GPL 2 or later. ---------------------------------- you will accept it?

Of course we can make it a policy to only accept packages without copyright header - is that your suggestion?

I suggest not to silently add a copyright header ;-) I'm not sure if a copyright/license header is needed at all for a specfile (IANAL). If it is required (and missing), I'd propose the same way as for missing COPYING file [1] etc. when submitting a package to factory: Open a bugreport, assign it to the submitter and ask him to add a copyright/license header to the specfile. Or (less paperwork) decline the SR and ask the submitter to add the copyright/license header and resubmit the package. Regards, Christian Boltz [1] I went through the "missing COPYING file" already for patch2mail - the COPYING file blew up the installed package size from 5k to 23k, but the package is legally bug-free now ;-) I should have chosen the WTFPL to have a shorter license text ;-)) -- | imicha@kira:~> /etc/init.d/glaskugel start | bash: /etc/init.d/glaskugel: Datei oder Verzeichnis nicht gefunden ist das ein grundsätzliches problem bei SuSE? oder fehlt mir ein RPM? [Michael Meyer in suse-linux] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org

On Feb 02, 11 00:41:04 +0200, Dave Plater wrote:

...

the COPYING file blew up the installed package size from 5k to 23k, but the package is legally bug-free now ;-) I should have chosen the WTFPL to have a shorter license text ;-))

That is unfortunate. But on behalf of the legal team, receive my thanks for adding the COPYING file. :-) cheers, JW- -- o \ Juergen Weigert paint it green! __/ _=======.=======_ <V> | jw@suse.de back to ascii! __/ _---|____________\/ \ | 0911 74053-508 __/ (____/ /\ (/) | _____________________________/ _/ \_ vim:set sw=2 wm=8 SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nuernberg) SuSE. Supporting Linux since 1992. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org

On Tuesday 01 February 2011 23:19:40 Christian Boltz wrote:

Hello,

on Dienstag, 1. Februar 2011, Stephan Kulow wrote:

...

On Monday 31 January 2011 22:48:13 Christian Boltz wrote:

...

- please reconsider if this header makes sense nowadays. Given the fact

that several packages are completely maintained by community members not employed by Novell/SUSE, I somehow doubt...

It's impossible to have files without copyright headers and if there are none, we put the default copyright in place.

So if I put in something like

---------------------------------- (c) Christian Boltz 2010-2011

This spec file is licensed under GPL 2 or later.

Only if you've read and follow the GPLv2 - and I doubt you want it for spec files if you've read it. Greetings, Stephan -- Sent from openSUSE -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org

On 01/02/11 07:44, Stephan Kulow wrote:

It's impossible to have files without copyright headers and if there are none, we put the default copyright in place.

[citation needed] -- Best Regards / S pozdravom, Pavol RUSNAK SUSE LINUX, s.r.o openSUSE Boosters Team Lihovarska 1060/12 PGP 0xA6917144 19000 Praha 9 prusnak[at]opensuse.org Czech Republic -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org