TODO for zope2.12 package?
Jonas Meurer
jonas at freesources.org
Mon Apr 25 16:26:34 UTC 2011
Hey,
On 25/04/2011 Arnaud Fontaine wrote:
> Today, Gaël and me tested the package of Zope 1.12[0] following the IRC
> meeting where it has been decided to have a tarball containing all the
> dependencies[1].
>
> Besides of minor changes committed in that repository, the package seems
> to work very well as I was able to create an instance without any glitch
> (Kudos to Michael Mulich, Jonas Meurer, Fabio Tranchitella and Bernd
> Zeimetz for their great work on the package!).
>
> So, as I'm quite new to Zope packaging, I'm wondering what are the
> remaining things to do before actually uploading the package? Are there
> any remaining important issues to address?
that's great news. thanks a lot for your work as well.
> Also, I have a question which may sound stupid though: how do you find
> out which Python modules to include directly into the tarball and the
> ones which should be put into Depends field? I thought it might be
> related to comments in the buildout recipes where it is stated which
> module APIs are not backward compatible anymore and will break... Or is
> it by just comparing the versions in Debian and the buildout recipe, and
> if newer, then add them to the tarball after checking that it's not
> actually working? Any hint?
i think this is a change remaining to be done: as far as i remember, we
decided to not use any packaged zope eggs at all, but use local copies
in the zope2.12 orig tarball instead for all of them.
i guess that the variable DEB_SATISFIED in debian/rules controls, which
zope eggs are fetched by get-orig-source, and which are excluded. this
whole exclusion code is not required if we use local copies of _all_
eggs. thus michaels scripts unter debian/build-scripts can be simplified
a lot.
appart from that, debian/copyright needs to be double-checked and the
format updated. and i suggest to add a debian/README.source which
explains how and why the orig.tar.gz tarball is created, mentions our
arguments against using packaged zope eggs, and points out that we're
aware of the problems regarding security fixes.
once the packages are into NEW, we should send a mail to ftpmasters and
the debian security team and ask them for their opinion.
i fear that ftpmasters will reject our packages as long as we don't take
the time to explain the situation in detail to them.
greetings,
jonas
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-zope-developers/attachments/20110425/e4bc35fd/attachment.pgp>
More information about the pkg-zope-developers
mailing list