[Mongrel] The Debian Plan - reloaded

Filipe filipe at icewall.org
Fri Jan 12 13:53:39 EST 2007

On Fri, 12 Jan 2007, Zed A. Shaw wrote:

> On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 08:01:59 -0200 (BRST)
> Filipe <filipe at icewall.org> wrote:
> I finally have time to answer this...
>> So, we have some favors to ask from you (the mongrel developers), as
>> those favors are not big things:
>> * Could you please upload tar.gz files together with your gems files?
> As an open source contributor, I know you feel like donating some time to make this happen.  If you write the rake file task and patch that creates the tar.gz with the proper version number and puts it into pkg/ then I'll run that task for you and upload the file.  That way you get control over how you like it packaged rather than me doing it 20 times until you say it's nice.

Ok, I will. But it is a simple tar.gz with the same content of
data.tar.gz from the gem.
> Otherwise, I tag each release in svn.  Maybe you cold convince the debian build system to use that.  Should be easier as well since you don't have to troll a download page.

After etch I can raise this subject. Now, the core developers are going
crazy :/

>> * In this tar, could the files be with the current date, not in year
>> 1969? :D tar complains a lot about this...
> I believe only rubygems does this because it uses a ruby version of tar.

Strange. I'll go up with this and see why rubygems or ruby do this.
Thanks for the path.
>> * When release candidates are released, can you append something like
>> "~rc1" to the tar file? This help debian auto tools to check new
>> releases.
> There's also a problem with how Rake and/or rubygems likes its version numbers.  It won't accept ~rc1 style endings for various design reasons.

Hum... then -rc1? :D Well, I take a look at this when generating the rake

>> * Finally,  I got this great idea for Mongrel.  All you have to do is
>> completely change the internal processing, add 200 more methods to the
>> HTTP parser, and... no. Just joking. Just the other 3 would be great!
> Ha!
>> The Debian ruby-extras team has a page[1] dedicated to upstream
>> developers, where those and other things that help *nix distributions
>> are described.
> I'll give you guys a slight clue though.  Mongrel is packaged on lots of other operating systems.  So far OSX, SuSE, FreeBSD, Win32, Fedora and probably more I don't know anything about.  Not a single one of them asked me to change the project setup to accommodate their build systems.  OSX asked me to change the license but that's it.
> If Debian has to ask people to change their projects, then maybe there's something wrong with Debian's build system.  I know Debian folks can *never* admit there might be something wrong, but just consider it.  There might just be some improvement you could make to be as capable as the other OS out there.

Hey, I can make packages with the actual format of the files. But I need
to admit it: creating packages from gems give me a lot of extra work.
The reason is that in Debian we try not to touch the original source,
like in [1]. We just download it, then apply patches (if needed) and compile it.
But well, there can be other ways. We just need time (a lot of) and will
(lots and lots of) to propose it and get it aproved. Debian is a lot bureaucratic.

And maybe people from  OSX, SuSE, FreeBSD, Win32, Fedora, Gentoo (they have
some packages too) can benefit from the tar file too, don 't you think?
I don't know how they build systems works, so I cannot speak for them.

The big problem for debian ruby-extra team is that we are trying to bind
diferrents worlds: one that is a lot conservative (debian) and one that
is fast and exciting (ruby)! It gives a lot of trouble. But still being

> Just a thought.

Thanks for listen and for the chance to write the task.

filipe lautert

filipe { AT } icewall.org
Linux User        #279798
Jabber  lautert at jabber.ru


More information about the Mongrel-users mailing list