Bug#406935: Upload for LedgerSMB Debian package?
On Fri, 2012-04-20 at 11:25 -0400, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Yeah, I don't have time to do a in-depth review, but from what I looked at > the last time, the package seems in a mostly good shape. Maybe Antoine can > take care of it now that you fixed the debconf issue? What do you think Antoine? Jame -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#406935: Upload for LedgerSMB Debian package?
Hi Raphael! On Thu, 2012-04-19 at 03:22 -0400, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Wed, 18 Apr 2012, Robert James Clay wrote: > > But would they accept it? I do want to get it into Debian unstable & > > then testing before the freeze, but besides that new versions are coming > > out fairly often (currently every couple of weeks or so) there is also > > the matter of that embedded copy of the Scriptaculous Javascript > > Library. Would they accept a new package with that still in it? > > (That's one reason I've been setting the changelog for experimental > > instead of the unstable distribution.) > The package goes through NEW only once, for experimental and for unstable. Would that mean that the ITP bug would also be closeable if it were uploaded to experimental at first instead of unstable? (Not that I necessarily think it needs to go that way now...) > So uploading to experimental doesn't change much. While it might be useful for when working on not using that embedded library, I no longer think the current package itself necessarily needs to start off by being uploaded to experimental instead of unstable. The package configuration using debconf/dbconfig-common isn't working the way I want it to (initially I just want it to enable setting the ledgersmb role and password properly) but that's why it's not enabled by default. (There's a note about that in Debian/NEWS.) I currently have several LXC systems (wheezy & now squeeze; I needed more local testing, including for new installs, so I created several of them) that I'm using for testing LedgerSMB and once it is configured (ledgersmb DB role created, Pg contrib_dir setting configured, apache config updated if necessary) it is usable. Different company databases can be created, I can log in to those companies, add users, make changes to the user access... Update installs of the package work from my local package repository. > As long as you document the reason why you have kept the copy, they > should have no problem with it. Well, do you think that "not yet tested with the Debian package versions" is sufficient reason? > You can also blindly replace it and hope for the best. More testing than what I can do by myself is certainly what I want to see, but "blindly" replacing it isn't the way I'd want to go... > Unstable is also here so that people can test :-) And that's certainly what the package needs more of. What do you think of the idea of uploading the LedgerSMB package to unstable now? Jame -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#406935: Upload for LedgerSMB Debian package?
Hi, On Wed, 18 Apr 2012, Robert James Clay wrote: > But would they accept it? I do want to get it into Debian unstable & > then testing before the freeze, but besides that new versions are coming > out fairly often (currently every couple of weeks or so) there is also > the matter of that embedded copy of the Scriptaculous Javascript > Library. Would they accept a new package with that still in it? > (That's one reason I've been setting the changelog for experimental > instead of the unstable distribution.) > > As I note in the Lintian overrides file, although the library is > packaged for Debian it's not the same versions as what upstream uses. > Upstream did note that they don't use "a lot of advanced stuff" so it > may work; thing is, though, I haven't had a chance to do any testing of > LedgerSMB with the packaged version of the Library. The package goes through NEW only once, for experimental and for unstable. So uploading to experimental doesn't change much. As long as you document the reason why you have kept the copy, they should have no problem with it. Wordpress has multiple copies as well when I fear that they are incompatible. You can also blindly replace it and hope for the best. Unstable is also here so that people can test :-) You can create a fake RC bug if you want to keep the package out of testing until you have had the time to test by yourself if you really prefer. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer Pre-order a copy of the Debian Administrator's Handbook and help liberate it: http://debian-handbook.info/liberation/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#406935: Upload for LedgerSMB Debian package?
On Tue, 2012-04-17 at 18:27 -0400, Antoine Beaupré wrote: > Otherwise: good work on the package, Thanks! > I may be able to upload this to unstable But would they accept it? I do want to get it into Debian unstable & then testing before the freeze, but besides that new versions are coming out fairly often (currently every couple of weeks or so) there is also the matter of that embedded copy of the Scriptaculous Javascript Library. Would they accept a new package with that still in it? (That's one reason I've been setting the changelog for experimental instead of the unstable distribution.) As I note in the Lintian overrides file, although the library is packaged for Debian it's not the same versions as what upstream uses. Upstream did note that they don't use "a lot of advanced stuff" so it may work; thing is, though, I haven't had a chance to do any testing of LedgerSMB with the packaged version of the Library. Jame -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
