Re: Clarifications regarding GNOME Online Accounts

[solarliner gmail com]

A solution would be for distribution package maintainers to use the
binary tarball as a base instead of sources - this way the build can be
done with secrets (ie. using GitLab CI and environment variable
secrets) and sent to distributions for packaging. This certainly puts
GNOME in a unique position in the landscape, though it allows for GNOME
to control the build process in such a way that build secrets become
possible.

Though if this is the way it goes, be sure to be prepared for all the
"GNOME forbids people to build their software stack" headlines,
followed by a "actually the reason is that they needed to handle
secrets in their builds in order to support client keys for the various
integrations in the software" in the third paragraph.

Le samedi 16 février 2019 à 13:06 -0600, mcatanzaro gnome org a écrit :
> On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 12:57 PM, mcatanzaro gnome org wrote:
> > It's not clear to me how g-o-a can continue to exist, then. Also, 
> > Epiphany's Safe Browsing support. (How do Firefox and Chromium
> > make 
> > this work?)
>
> Turns out it's a new restriction that took effect on January 16,
> 2019. 
> So probably we've only been in violation for one month now. (You can 
> see the previous version of the terms of use are from 2011 and do
> not 
> include that requirement.)
>
> Anyway, we can't have secrets in the build, so we don't have a lot
> of 
> options. Maybe not any options. At least, I don't see any.
>
> Michael
>
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-devel-list mailing list
> desktop-devel-list gnome org
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list