[asterisk-dev] CentOS packaging

[Jared Smith]

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Matthew Jordan <mjordan at digium.com> wrote:

> (1) I fully appreciate the annoyance of having embedded libraries in
> Asterisk. While some of those embedded libraries may be difficult to
> extract, some - most likely - could be removed at this point. I would
> love to see patches proposed for Asterisk that removed some of the
> external libraries (editline and mxml are two that come readily to
> mind).
>

I'm pretty sure we either had or have a patch in Fedora for editline...
I'll look at it a bit later.


>
> (2) The policy of any distribution is, and should be, set by that
> distribution. If a distribution has a policy that precludes it from
> including packages of Asterisk, I fully respect that. At the same
> time, that does not mean that said policy - even when it is well
> intentioned - will always make the most sense either for the Asterisk
> project or for projects that Asterisk depends on.
>

I agree wholeheartedly.  It's discussions like these that help us make the
most of the situation when the policies intersect.


> That being said, I have a very difficult time understanding how
> Asterisk 11 can have packages for Fedora but Asterisk 12 cannot.
>

It's not that Asterisk 12 cannot be packaged for Fedora -- it's that nobody
has done it yet, due to the work of trying to get dependencies like
pjproject packaged up and approved.


Due to the demands of certain members of the Asterisk community [1],
> we spent a considerable amount of effort removing pjproject from
> Asterisk 12. This was a good thing to do: it made the Asterisk build
> system cleaner and resulted in numerous improvements to pjproject that
> have been included in the up stream distribution [2]. Today, we have a
> version of Asterisk that contains fewer embedded libraries, as well as
> a version of pjproject that can be made into packages (even if those
> packages are not suitable for some Linux distributions).
>

This is definitely a good thing, and if I haven't said it loudly enough
already, thank you very much.  It makes a huge difference.


> Despite this, the decision was made that Asterisk 12 was unsuitable
> for packaging in the Fedora distribution, due to it using (but not
> strictly depending on) pjproject.
>

Again, I don't think anybody in Fedora (at least that I know of) is
rejecting Asterisk 12 -- we simply need to either package Asterisk 12 up
without pjproject (option 1), or get pjproject packaged up (without it's
third_party directory) appropriately (option 2), and then get Asterisk 12
into Fedora.  I'm trying to find time to work on option 2.  If anybody on
the list wants to help out, you can follow along at
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728302.

--
Jared Smith
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/attachments/20140227/d2f43996/attachment.html>