incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Schaefer <>
Subject Re: Moving Category-B tarballs (was Re: [PROPOSAL] Starting the graduation process)
Date Sat, 02 Jun 2012 22:30:41 GMT
> From: Rob Weir <>
>Sent: Saturday, June 2, 2012 6:20 PM
>Subject: Re: Moving Category-B tarballs (was Re: [PROPOSAL] Starting the graduation process)
>On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Joe Schaefer <> wrote:
>> This situation doesn't seem to be diffusing itself,
>> even tho I have tried to explain that the 3.4.0 release
>> deps "packaging" does not comply with infra policy.
>> Surely there is a middle ground here- that the missing
>> release deps package simply be generated from those
>> tarballs in svn.  So long as the source release uses
>> deps from the (downloaded from mirrors) deps package
>> instead of directly from svn, AFAICT this project will
>> be in compliance with all legal and infra policies.
>So what would the status of the debs tarball be?  Is it part of the
>release?  Do we vote on it?  It has cat-b source in it, so one would
>think that this could not be in a release, and not on the mirrors?  Or
>is there a recognized exception for dependencies provided as a

There are few if any legal policy constraints on convenience artfacts-
if you go through the mirrors you will find instances of non-open-source
items (eg  Windows installers, binaries, etc).  Convenience artifacts
do not form the basis of a release vote.  I see no reason why the
licensing on source artifacts that we distribute as a convenience
should be more restrictive than the licensing on binaries- policy
designed around Java artifacts isn't meant to place unreasonable
limits on what AOO can reasonably distribute on the mirrors.

Does that help?

>> Whether that's best practice is debatable, but I don't
>> believe it's so unreasonable that a rational person
>> would withhold their participation in the project over it.
>> HTH
>>> From: Pedro Giffuni <>
>>>To:; Jürgen Schmidt <>
>>>Sent: Saturday, June 2, 2012 5:52 PM
>>>Subject: Re: Moving Category-B tarballs (was Re: [PROPOSAL] Starting the graduation
>>>On 06/02/12 15:11, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>>> Well I am a committer in the only big UNIX-like
>>>>> distribution that is carrying Apache OpenOffice
>>>>> nowadays. We would really like to use a source
>>>>> distribution through ASF mirrors but since the ASF
>>>>> doesn't provide one that works well we have been
>>>>> rolling our own. Having a working source
>>>>> distribution would help attract linux packagers,
>>>>> I think.
>>>> well if that is really the case you have failed on several levels
>>>> - you didn't really have used or tried the source tarball
>>>> - you didn't gave the appropriate and necessary feedback
>>>> - you didn't helped to fix your concerns relating the source release. At
least it seems you have some concerns
>>>Sure, I am not perfect but you can't really blame the
>>>messenger if the package was broken.
>>>I have huge experience packaging stuff for my own selfish
>>>purposes in the past (BRL-CAD, FEM utilities, stuff like that),
>>>however I am not a ports committer/packager myself;
>>>I am a src committer. You can see my work in some sound
>>>drivers, the ext2fs implementation and some compiler
>>>updates. I have been very busy between kernel coding
>>>and the AOO SVN stuff to work also on the AOO
>>>The vast packaging work in FreeBSD has been done by
>>>Maho-san for several years and he has been so efficient
>>>I haven't really had to intervene other than to give some
>>>minor suggestions. He is a ports committer and I am so
>>>glad he has been around to take care of things.
>>>I have been busy on some updates and I only noticed
>>>a few days ago that we are not using the source tarballs
>>>provided by Apache. I can't really test everything behind
>>>a release and, with due respect, all I do is voluntary work
>>>so I do have to spend my time in other activities too.
>>>I am attempting to provide some feedback here but
>>>I would suggest you ask the guys doing Ubuntu or
>>>Debian packaging if they are using the src tarballs
>>>and how we can make the packaging easier.
>>>> That makes me really thinking ...
>>>Please stop imagining things. I know you guys are not
>>>happy about having to do extra reshuffling in the tree
>>>and playing with scripts to adapt things to what *I*
>>>think is the Apache way. In all honesty let's admit I had
>>>mentioned this was a grey area since a long time ago
>>>and I have even offered to step aside and let
>>>the project evolve on it's own.

View raw message