Add spec for brew package URLs

[woodruffw]

This adds the brew purl type.

Closes #254.

[woodruffw]

CC @p-linnane @SMillerDev @colindean for thoughts as well 🙂

[colindean]

One major nit and a few non-blocking questions and suggestions

[colindean]

question (non-blocking): When thinking about the examples below, I think you should clarify how purl spec should handle version-in-formula formulae.

As in, if I want PostgreSQL 12.17 (current release as of this posting), should the purl be

pkg:brew/postgresql@[email protected]

or

pkg:brew/[email protected]

and let whatever's reading the purl — Homebrew, ostensibly — figure out how that version maps to our major-version formulae?

I speculate only the latter is a valid purl, a safe assumption because I don't think it's a good idea to allow two @ in the purl.

[woodruffw]

Thanks for calling this out -- my read of the purl spec is that the name and other components are always URL-escaped, e.g. pkg:brew/postgresql@[email protected] would actually be encoded as pkg:brew/postgresql%[email protected] in a "wire format" context. So the purl should always unambiguously map to a package, without the end client having to do additional disambiguation work.

This is a readability sacrifice, but my (potentially wrong) understanding is that purls are mostly meant to show up only in machine-readable contexts anyways.

[colindean]

Sigh, it's not pretty, but if that's the way it needs to be, so be it. If that's the case, I'd recommend adding an example with that…

[woodruffw]

Done! Looks like the other examples for other ecosystem purls also contain URL-escaping examples, so we're in-line here 🙂

[matt-phylum]

pkg:brew/postgresql@[email protected] is incorrect. The instructions for parsing a PURL (which not all implementations follow) say to split on @ from the right, so it should parse as you expect for Homebrew, but the spec says that @ must always be escaped when it's not being used as the delimiter before the version number. It'd definitely be good to have an example and maybe even call this out since it's common for people to install packages with names like this.

giterlizzi/perl-URI-PackageURL has name "postgresql" version "12" (and discards the "12.17")

maenchen/purl, sonatype/package-url-java have name "postgresql" version "[email protected]"

package-url/packageurl-js throws an error (I thought I saw a fix for this, but maybe the PR hasn't merged)

[woodruffw]

Yep, I added @colindean's example below. Adding an explicit callout also makes sense to me; I'll add some language for that.

[colindean]

question (non-blocking): Should there be another parameter to name the tap? We use the named tap at work, e.g.

brew tap myco/brewhouse [email protected]:brew/house.git

and the formula, uh, myco-ctl could have a purl

pkg:brew/myco/brewhouse/[email protected]:brew/house.git

and brew would know how to name the tap if it needed to be tapped, or perhaps

pkg:brew/myco/brewhouse/[email protected]:brew/house.git&tap_name=myco/brewhouse

or more simply

pkg:brew/[email protected]:brew/house.git&tap_name=myco/brewhouse

[woodruffw]

My 0.02c would be for your first form:

pkg:brew/myco/brewhouse/[email protected]:brew/house.git

I think that's unambiguous: the github.com/{org}/homebrew-{tap} logic only applies when a tap_url isn't present, so I think this is the shortest form that conveys all needed information. But maybe I've overlooked something?

[colindean]

Sigh, it's not pretty, but if that's the way it needs to be, so be it. If that's the case, I'd recommend adding an example with that…

[pombredanne]

@MikeMcQuaid 👋 A quick review or ack from you would awesome!

[pombredanne]

Thanks!
LGTM overall, though the double @ in postgres@[email protected] name seems a bit weird. Is it possible to run brew install postgres@[email protected] or instead brew install [email protected] or instead brew install postgres%[email protected]

[matt-phylum]

According to Stack Overflow, you cannot install a specific version. pkg:brew/postgresql%[email protected] means version 16.1 of Postgres from the postgresql@16 package, which is useful for answering "what's installed?", but apparently not useful for trying to install the same package. The repository apparently doesn't keep old versions: https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-core/blob/HEAD/Formula/p/[email protected]

[woodruffw]

LGTM overall, though the double @ in postgres@[email protected] name seems a bit weird. Is it possible to run brew install postgres@[email protected] or instead brew install [email protected] or instead brew install postgres%[email protected]

Both brew install postgres and brew install postgres@16 are supported, but the others aren't. Homebrew doesn't really support multiple versions of the same package (per what @matt-phylum said) -- the @X syntax is a hack that Homebrew does to allow multiple versions of the same package to exist in a tap when the ecosystem can't all exist on a single version (e.g. OpenSSL, Python, etc.).

TL;DR yes, there is no way to install a specific minor version, e.g. postgres 16.1. postgres@16 is the full name of a formula, referring specifically to whatever latest version of postgres 16 is packaged by Homebrew.

Link for reference: https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-core/blob/master/Formula/p/postgresql%4016.rb

[MikeMcQuaid]

Looks good to me!

[woodruffw]

Gentle ping for review+approval here: this is no longer a blocker in Homebrew's attestation work, but I'd like to get it in so that we can consider it for any future attestation changes, if necessary 🙂

[woodruffw]

Another gentle ping for review here!

[captn3m0]

+1 for merging this.

[matt-phylum]

I think it's important for this PR to add entries to the test suite. Package names can contain the @ character and this is not handled correctly by maennchen/purl (maennchen/purl#10) or anchore/packageurl-go (does not accept bug reports). Both fail to handle pkg:brew/postgres%4016.

There's also a common misimplementation of the parsing spec which can cause problems here. The spec says "Split the remainder once from the right on '@'. The left side is the remainder. Percent-decode the right side. This is the version." However, some implementations split once from the left on '@'. If somebody writes pkg:brew/postgres@[email protected] (non-canonical. the test should ensure the correct canonicalization):

• anchore/packageurl-go, maennchen/purl, sonatype/package-url-java parse it as postgres version [email protected] (split from the left instead of the right)
• giterlizzi/perl-URI-PackageURL parse it as version 16 (somehow discarding the 16.1)
• package-url/packageurl-js throws an exception (Incorrect validation of version encoding packageurl-js#57)

{
  "description": "brew names may contain at signs",
  "purl": "pkg:brew/postgres%4016",
  "canonical_purl": "pkg:brew/postgres%4016",
  "type": "brew",
  "namespace": null,
  "name": "postgres@16",
  "version": null,
  "qualifiers": null,
  "subpath": null,
  "is_invalid": false
},
{
  "description": "brew may contain multiple at signs",
  "purl": "pkg:brew/postgres@[email protected]",
  "canonical_purl": "pkg:brew/postgres%[email protected]",
  "type": "brew",
  "namespace": null,
  "name": "postgres@16",
  "version": "16.1",
  "qualifiers": null,
  "subpath": null,
  "is_invalid": false
}

[woodruffw]

Makes sense, although the ship has since sailed on the main backing feature that I needed this for (Homebrew's build provenance feature, which instead uses Homebrew's own wheel filename format for its subject).

As such, I don't have any time allocated for this in the immediate future. I'll try and get back to it when I do have some slack time, but if it's a pressing feature for anyone in the next 1-3 months I have no objection to someone else taking ownership here.

Edit: @colindean has graciously done this 🙂

[colindean]

💪 I like this test case setup.

[colindean]

@woodruffw I got one wrong upon reviewing the unresolved comments. Please merge this suggestion.

@matt-phylum I think the rest of the comments can be resolved.

[tonylturner]

Is there an update on this issue? I came here to submit a similar issue and was glad to see this but it's been open for 9 months now. Any ETA on review?

[woodruffw]

From the perspective of the Homebrew upstream, this has been done and is ready for final review/merge since June. It'd be nice to have a repository owner to shepherd this, although I'm not exactly sure who that'd be (@pombredanne perhaps? 🙂)

[jkowalleck]

please also remove brew from the list "Other candidate types to define"

[woodruffw]

please also remove bre from the list "Other candidate types to define"

Done with f8fd63e; PTAL.

[johnmhoran]

Thank you for your PR @woodruffw. When you have the chance, could you please resolve the conflicts referred to below?