On 31-Aug-10 20:37, graziano obertelli wrote:
we would love to be able to coordinate with Fedora about Fedora's
releases and web page (where to file bugs and where to find packages): are
you the right person to coordinate with?
I maintain Fedora's euca2ools package, so I ultimately see all of the
bug reports raised against it on Red Hat's Bugzilla . When people
file bug reports against Fedora's package I usually forward it upstream
and then try to backport the resulting fix into Fedora's package. While
I typically wait for stable upstream releases before looking into adding
features, I can try to accommodate RFEs as well. If you need something
fixed that is the best place to send communications. For other
cloud-related things this list is probably better.
Where possible, please direct people to their systems' native package
managers (e.g. yum or PackageKit in Fedora) instead of offering binaries
via the Eucalyptus web site. This reduces confusion for me as a package
maintainer since I don't have to worry about where someone's software
came from, and for the Eucalyptus people since it's one less
distribution to build for.
At one point someone looked into packaging Eucalyptus, though it cannot
make it into Fedora until all of its dependencies are broken out into
separate packages and it doesn't bundle any JAR files. Since there is
currently no Fedora package for Eucalyptus, this mailing list is
probably the best point of contact for work on getting it packaged.
We already have one engineer looking into the euca2ools packages. He
already reached out to the euca2ools packages and we hope to have only one
I assume you are referring to Mitch Garnatt here, who I contacted
independently a few days ago. ;-) The notion of "only one package" is
a bad idea for binaries since different distributions have different
conventions and software versions. Having one spec file that supports
multiple distributions is definitely possible, though. I discussed this
a bit with Mitch. For licensing reasons I cannot simply provide you
with a spec file that does what you need, though I am happy to provide
Ideally, Eucalyptus will not provide any binaries at all, but instead
have packages included in distributions' package repositories. This
would render upstream-provided spec files and packages meaningless. For
instance, as a Fedora packager I cannot use the euca2ools spec file
included with its source because I must maintain my own spec file in
Fedora's version control system.
How do you think we should proceed for Eucalyptus? Is it possible to
a 'mentor' to help us get Eucalyptus into Fedora?
I would first work on breaking the dependencies into separate packages
and make sure it is possible to build Eucalyptus in its entirety from
source without the need for JAR files. I personally don't have much
experience with Java packaging, but you can also direct questions to
either Fedora's packaging list  or this list. There are plenty of
people who can help.