[Dev] [prosody-community-modules] proposed package for prosody's modules

[Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli]

On Mon, 15 Aug 2022 19:26:25 +0200
Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo at cyberdimension.org> wrote:
> PS: Note that it is also possible to send patches for review. This
> way we can reuse your commit message, so if you have interesting
> things to add there they get included in the commit.
By patches I meant something like sending a single patch to add the
prosody-community-modules PKGBUILD in abslibre. 

If the patch is not pushed (yet) in abslibre and needs modifications,
it's usually easier for maintainers to review a new version of that
patch/PKGBUILD instead of having to review patches on top of the first
PKGBUILD being sent.

On Wed, 17 Aug 2022 10:20:48 +0300
Wael Karram <wael at waelk.tech> wrote:
> Here is the PKGBUILD for the package that'd go in nonprism.
> I've also attached the whole list of modules that I've excluded.
Did you manage to make the PKGBUILD clone a specific mercurial
revision, or did I miss that? 

This is important because otherwise users and people building this
PKGBUILD will expect a specific revision (0.12.1) of the
prosody-community-modules and will instead get the last revision at the
time the package was built.

If the idea is to have the latest revision, this brings several issues.

Aur has packages that use the latest (usually git) revisions, so when
users automatically builds them, they get the latest revision at the
time they build it. 

Parabola doesn't have something like that so we end up having to use a
fixed revision at least for the packages we ship. And some Parabola
contributor(s) really want PKGBUILDS to use known releases.

If your goal is to always have the latest revision, we can try to find
solutions for that, like publishing the PKGBUILD in a separate
repository in abslibre but letting users build it with makepkg.

In that case the PKGBUILD would also need to be modified to communicate
that to users. In pcr/omap-u-boot-utils-git/PKGBUILD, there is an
example that shows how to set pkgver and pkgname for git.

As for the information in modules_requiring_special_treatment, it is
very useful, so it would be sad to loose it. To avoid that it could be
added as-is in the PKGBUILD inside comments.

It also has comments like that inside
> mod_pubsub_feeds: seems to include unlicensed code.

Here if we don't use mksource(), Parabola would end up shipping
binary packages without mod_pubsub_feeds (as you removed it if I recall
well), but it would also ship the mod_pubsub_feeds source code.

So it's probably easier to use mksource() to make sure that Parabola
doesn't accidentally redistribute code that could make Parabola liable.

There are also other options for that but they are more complicated.

Denis.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/attachments/20220817/a3a225d5/attachment.sig>