Re: [gentoo-dev] paper on oss-qm project

[Sebastian Pipping]

On 05/08/10 22:11, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> what problems do you see w/ licensing ?
>
> IMHO, each branch simply has to follow the upstream's license.

i have yet to see easy cases with licensing.
i haven't thought about it in detail yet, tough, to be honest.


> simply normalize: don't use letters but numbers.

i don't believe in simple normalization before i have seen it.


> b) it's not really a release but just a development snapshot -
>    that doesnt belong into the main oss-qm repository

why doesn't it belong in there?


> I've chosen that scheme to make the borders more clear (also for
> automatic filtering, etc). In my concept, the vendor is the major
> point of distinction, package comes at second, ...

i guess we agree to disagree then.
i don't think the current scheme promotes cooperation well.


> Well, the term vendor here is defined as a party which provides
> packages in certain variants. "UPSTREAM" is a kind of meta vendor,
> describing the upstreams. "Vendor" is IMHO more generic, since there
> may be vendors who aren't actually a real distro. For example, I
> myself don't publish a complete distro, but a foundation for clean
> building especially for special embedded devices or appliances.

yes, that's why i proposed "downstream" as a replacement.
you don't consider yourself downstream?


> Yes, that's still an open topic. I've chosen to use one big repo
> for easier maintenance, but I'm aware of the problem that the
> repo might become very fat some day.

my point is not about size, only about "users".


> I see two options:
>
> a) split it off into several ones, eg. on per-package basis
>    and create a system for (semi-)automatic mass-repo maintenance
>    (not completely trivial when using free git hosters as mirrors)

are you aware that splitting it up will reduce the savings in space?
say if they all had byte-identical GPLv3 COPYING files that would be one
blob atm and N blobs in split mode.


> b) add an selective filtering system. AFIAK current stable git
>    doesnt provide that yet - I've added an little patch for that:
>    http://repo.or.cz/w/oss-qm-packages.git/shortlog/refs/heads/METUX.git.master

while i'm not sure about this in detail yet, could it be this loop
misses to filter the very first entry?

+       while (walk && (walk->next))
+       {
+               if (_filter_remote_ref(transport, walk->next))
+                       walk->next = walk->next->next;
+               else
+                       walk = walk->next;
+       }
+

best,




sebastian