What about starting to use project-builder for native packages?

[Thomas Spuhler]

On Wednesday 14 April 2010 02:34:02 pm Gunnar Wrobel wrote:
> Quoting Richard Bos <ml at radoeka.nl>:
> 
> > On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 11:47:57PM +0200, Gunnar Wrobel wrote:
> >> Hi (especially to the native packagers),
> >>
> >> would it be okay to start building (or at least to start trying to
> >> build) packages via project-builder (http://trac.project-builder.org/)?
> >>
> >> I looked a little bit closer at the tool at the end of last week and I
> >> got the impression that this would serve us well. I admit this was not
> >> yet an in-depth check but at the moment I'm pretty convinced it should
> >> allow us to create simple packages for several distributions at the same
> >> time.
> >>
> >> Mathieu suggested using this tool a while ago. Richard suggested using
> >> the OpenSUSE build system. While I like that system it does not deliver
> >> packages for a specific distribution that is (still) critical to the
> >> Kolab server: OpenPKG. project-builder is probably slightly more
> >> complicated but it also is somewhat more flexible.
> >
> > It seems possible to have an openpkg target at the openSUSE Build  
> > Service (OBS):
> > http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-buildservice/2010-04/msg00117.html
> >
> > Would it be possible to provide Adrian S. (OBS maintainer / developer)
> > with openpkg packages that are needed to e.g build the PEAR packages?
> >
> > I still see problems that are to be solved, like e.g the specific
> > openpkg spec file.  But all of this might be solvable....
> 
> Maybe I shouldn't have cited the lack of OpenPKG support as the only  
> reason why I'm not certain that we should rely on the OpenSUSE build  
> service. In theory project-builder does not limit us in any way  
> concerning the distributions we build packages for. So it could also  
> be pkgsrc or Gentoo. And these ones would definitely be hard to get on  
> the OpenSUSE build service.
> 
> Nevertheless the likelihood that we have an interest in supporting  
> these less widespread distros is not too high. So this argument is not  
> that important.
> 
> Another reason for preojectbuilder might be that we do not want to  
> fully rely on an external build service. I consider it important that  
> we are always able to build our own packages.
> 
> The fact that it currently has no OpenPKG support also means we would  
> have to wait a while until we can fully use it.
> 
> Anyhow: You made it clear that you'd still rather like to go the  
> OpenSUSE build service route. And I think it has the advantage of  
> being an easy solution.
> 
> But when I reconsidered the build service I thought we might also  
> simply use both. As far as I understand it we only need decent spec  
> files for the build service. Plus the source package. Is that right?  
> Both are things that are being delivered by project builder. So it  
> might be rather easy to do the basic template definition in the  
> project builder and only generate the source package and the spec for  
> the subsequent build service step. For all distros not supported by  
> the build service we could fully build the packages.
> 
> Do you think that might work?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Gunnar
> 
I agree with some of the concerns Gunnar has. The packages built on the OpenSuse BS will not work on other distros. But I think if they build and work on OpenbSuse or Debian or etc. they would build and work on other distros with much less work and effort to put in than the current openpkg versions. It would more encourge packagers of other distros to build and provide native version on their distros.

-- 
Thomas