Re: [opensuse-contrib] Re: [obs submit-request 8018] openSUSE:Factory:Contrib/flock-browser: created by rwooninck
Petr Uzel wrote:
On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 02:44:39PM +0100, Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
Hi,
Petr Uzel schrieb:
On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 07:35:28PM +0000, tittiatwork@hotmail.com wrote:
home:rwooninck/flock-browser -> openSUSE:Factory:Contrib/flock-browser
https://build.opensuse.org/package/show?package=flock-browser&project=home:rwooninck https://build.opensuse.org/package/show?package=flock-browser&project=openSUSE:Factory:Contrib
Description: This is the Flock Social Web browser. It is based on Mozilla Firefox, but more focused on Social Networking, blogging, etc Hi!
Please, enable building for both i586 and x86_64 in the project from which you are submitting to Contrib. It makes the review easier.
Not that I'm completely against that (or have anything to decide here either ,-)) but this is a binary repackage instead of a source build. Is there any reason for that?
Yes, that I can easily verify that it builds for both archs (the first step I usually do in review).
The fact that it is a binary repackage is another point (see mail from Marcus).
Hi Petr and all, I didn't know that my request would cause difficulties, As far as I know the flock browser is GPL, however I just repackaged their binary package, It seems that this is not allowed, so I will revoke the package request. I apologize, but I am learning the rules along the way and experience. Regards Raymond -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-contrib+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-contrib+help@opensuse.org
On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 08:55:46PM +0100, Raymond Wooninck wrote:
The fact that it is a binary repackage is another point (see mail from Marcus).
Hi Petr and all,
Hi,
I didn't know that my request would cause difficulties, As far as I know the flock browser is GPL, however I just repackaged their binary package,
It seems that this is not allowed, so I will revoke the package request.
In fact, I don't actually think that it is completely disallowed to repackage a binary package (or it is???), but should be definitely avoided if 'normal' package can be made.
I apologize, but I am learning the rules along the way and experience.
No problem, thanks for contributing. -- Best regards / s pozdravem Petr Uzel, Packages maintainer --------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX, s.r.o. e-mail: puzel@suse.cz Lihovarská 1060/12 tel: +420 284 028 964 190 00 Prague 9 fax: +420 284 028 951 Czech Republic http://www.suse.cz -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-contrib+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-contrib+help@opensuse.org
On Tuesday 17 March 2009 07:54:57 Petr Uzel wrote:
In fact, I don't actually think that it is completely disallowed to repackage a binary package (or it is???), but should be definitely avoided if 'normal' package can be made.
And, on the first place, its much better for packager that will have to patch it. And you propably will :-). More over, if it is GPL, than you should distribute sources anyway. Petr -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-contrib+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-contrib+help@opensuse.org
On Tuesday 17 March 2009 07:54:57 Petr Uzel wrote:
In fact, I don't actually think that it is completely disallowed to repackage a binary package (or it is???), but should be definitely avoided if 'normal' package can be made.
And, on the first place, its much better for packager that will have to patch it. And you propably will :-). More over, if it is GPL, than you should distribute sources anyway. Petr
Petr Uzel napsal(a):
On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 08:55:46PM +0100, Raymond Wooninck wrote:
The fact that it is a binary repackage is another point (see mail from Marcus).
Hi Petr and all,
Hi,
I didn't know that my request would cause difficulties, As far as I know the flock browser is GPL, however I just repackaged their binary package,
It seems that this is not allowed, so I will revoke the package request.
In fact, I don't actually think that it is completely disallowed to repackage a binary package (or it is???), but should be definitely avoided if 'normal' package can be made.
If the package is GPL, then one problem is that the *.src.rpm doesn't contain the sources you are obliged to provide. You could provide the sources separately on demand, but when you haven't build the package yourself, you can't be 100% sure that the sources actually match the binary you are distributing. You are on the safe side if you rebuild from source :). Michal -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-contrib+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-contrib+help@opensuse.org
participants (5)
-
Michal Marek -
Petr Gajdos -
Petr Gajdoš
-
Petr Uzel -
Raymond Wooninck