[Pkg-xen-devel] XCP and OpenXenCenter

[Thomas Goirand]

Hi,

I could build the Xen 4.1.0 as per your explanations and patches once
you gave me the necessary build-depends. Now, I have few questions.

On 07/11/2011 03:19 PM, Mike McClurg wrote:
> Check out Jon Ludlam's github: https://github.com/jonludlam . The
> repositories you'll be interested in are xen-debian (changes to the
> debian xen package), xen-api-libs, xen-api, blktap (userland) and
> blktap-ko (module).

1/ blktap(-ko)
How much this blktap and blktap-ko differ from the one in the "normal"
pvops kernel? Will we need to build a kernel module package for that
one? If so, I wont be the right person to help for this (I have no
experience building that...).

2/ xen-api binary names
I had already a look into xen-api, and saw a spec file. It contains the
description of a lot of binary packages. Do you think we should continue
using the same names, eg:

xen-api-xe
xen-api-www
xen-api-tests
xen-api-squeezed
xen-api-v6d
xen-api-xenops
libxen-api-client-dev
libxen-api-client
libxen-api-datamodel-dev
libxen-api-datamodel
xen-api-docs

and same question for xen-api-libs:

xen-api-libs-utils
libxen-api
libxen-api-dev
xen-api-libs-fe

Are you ok with these binary names?

What would be the build order? To me, it seems that:
- xen-api-libs needs blktap
- xen-api needs xen-api-libs

So, we should work on blktap first, right? What would be the
build-depends of blktap and blktap-ko? What binary package should it build?

3/ Licenses

Under what license are these released? When I write this, I'm asking for
pointers for the debian/copyright. Of course, I saw the big LICENSE file
at the root of xen-api.git, but very often, there are hidden files
imported from other projects being written by others, and shipped with
other license. ftp-masters tend to HATE when we miss something (and they
are right with that). So, is everything LGPL 2.1?

At least, I've seen that the embedded copy of jquery is released under
MIT license... There are things which I have no information about like
jquery.treeview.js. Is that fully part of jquery as well?

I saw that on the source code of xen-api, there's an embedded version of
jquery. This is of course unacceptable for Debian. I mean, you can keep
that in your source, but the binary package will *not* use it, and it
should *not* be shipped. We should use the jquery that is in Debian. Is
that an issue? Do you have strong requirements on a specific version of
jquery?

Please take all these with a lot of care and help me buliding a correct
debian/copyright which will have some chance to pass the ftp-master guards.

4/ Build-Depends

For the moment, I have the following:

Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 8), libpam-ocaml-dev, texlive-base, omake,
ocaml-findlib, libxmlm-ocaml-dev, libtype-conv-camlp4-dev, libxen-dev,
zlib1g-dev

But it seems not enough. What I am missing? Once, I tried already to
build, and found the solution for the "ocamlfind: Package `stdext' not
found", but I can't remember. That's in xen-api-libs, right?

5/ Naming

Should we use "xen-api" or "xapi" ? To me "xen-api" seems more relevant,
and might avoid clashes with X-Window. What do you think?

6/ Package ownership

Over the years, I've taken too many responsibility in Debian. I maintain
too much packages, and I now realize that I can't do that much work. So
I'd be happy to help to have the project to start, but I don't think
it's a good idea if I am the only DD working on this.

Recently, I've done some really bad work with libdbi that I'm not proud
of at all. I don't want this to happen again.

So I really would like to find some other DD / contributors to work on
this with us.

Thomas