| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA256 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Marijn - 9:35 15.09.11 wrote: |
| 5 |
> Hi Michal, |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> On 09/14/11 10:56, Michal Hrusecky wrote: |
| 8 |
> > Hi, |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > new versions of eclasses after hopefully fixing most of the |
| 11 |
> > comments. |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> The download eclass speaks about ``openSUSE Build Service'' while the |
| 15 |
> other calls it the ``Open Build Service''. I note that the command |
| 16 |
> line tool dev-util/osc also speaks about ``Open Build Service''. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Things are a little bit complicated. Once upon a time, there were some |
| 19 |
people unhappy with the process of building packages for SUSE/openSUSE |
| 20 |
and they created server application and called it "openSUSE Build |
| 21 |
Service". As "openSUSE Build Service" is quite a long name, everybody |
| 22 |
started calling it just 'obs'. Even developers themselves. As obs |
| 23 |
supported building packages for many distributions and was open source, |
| 24 |
some other companies and organizations started using it (for example |
| 25 |
Meego). Some didn't even know what 'obs' stands for and assumed, that |
| 26 |
'o' is for 'Open'. But some other knew and was reluctant to use it |
| 27 |
because of openSUSE in it's name. So it got renamed to 'Open Build |
| 28 |
Service' (so the 'obs' abbreviation will still work). But the original |
| 29 |
first running publicly available instance is still called 'openSUSE |
| 30 |
Build Service'. So we've got a software, which is called "Open Build |
| 31 |
Service" and tools like dev-util/osc and it's plugins (obs services - |
| 32 |
what is second eclass intended for) that works with any instance. And |
| 33 |
we've got "openSUSE Build Service" which is basically build.opensuse.org |
| 34 |
server running Open Build Service :-D And as some SUSE guys are lazy to |
| 35 |
be a good upstream, they publish some source code and packages just |
| 36 |
through the openSUSE Build Service (that's what is the first eclass good |
| 37 |
for). |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
> Others have remarked on this, but could you please explain why there |
| 40 |
> are (going to be) ebuilds that don't/cannot use the full eclass? What |
| 41 |
> numbers are we talking about? |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
Currently, there are two more ebuilds that can make a use of |
| 44 |
obs-download.eclass: 'dev-util/osc' and 'dev-util/suse-build'. It is not |
| 45 |
that much of code duplication, but I think it could make ebuilds more |
| 46 |
readable. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
> How about using open-build-service in the name of the eclass(es)? |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
I personally dislike long file names and obs is well known abbreviation |
| 51 |
(in my google search, second link is http://guild.opensuse.org and first |
| 52 |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OBS which also list OBS as Open Build |
| 53 |
Service), although a little bit ambiguous. If it would be hard |
| 54 |
requirement for getting them in, I would consider expanding the 'obs', |
| 55 |
but personally I would prefer not to. |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
> Finally, has this seen any testing in an overlay? |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
Only locally - on my computer. Currently I have 3 services (osc plugins) |
| 60 |
that I needed to commit stuff with osc from git. |
| 61 |
|
| 62 |
- -- |
| 63 |
Michal Hrusecky <miska@g.o> |
| 64 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 65 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) |
| 66 |
|
| 67 |
iF4EAREIAAYFAk5xtNwACgkQpMQOFjUY7FXlQwEAqyoRWVzPxdq7Bf43wnPaeCXr |
| 68 |
o/jw7aKw8bCYokTEDlgA/306yyqBmePvSast4nOJJSg6KPi6QcLusC81QJJlKu9K |
| 69 |
=I8KK |
| 70 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives