[SoaS] Policy for activities for downstream inclusion

[pbrobinson at gmail.com]

On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Walter Bender <walter.bender at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 10:05 AM, David Farning <dfarning at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 5:27 AM, Simon Schampijer <simon at schampijer.de> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> what is the current status for activity releases in order to include
>>> them in distributions like Soas*? Do you guys need tarballs or did you
>>> switch over to construct the rpms from the .xo? For example the latest
>>> Paint rpm uses the .xo AFAIK (build even the binaries from the
>>> non-python sources in the bundle).
>>>
>>> And is the email from ASLO enough for packagers to know about new
>>> releases? Any other notification that packagers need?
>>
>> In the .deb side of the universe, we prefer tarballs but we can work
>> directly from the git repository.
>
> Is it not still the practice to put tarballs on download.sl.o ???

No its not! Sebastian and I got sick of sounding like broken down
records so I have no idea of the current status.

Peter