Bug#961432: RFP: picom -- lightweight compositor for X11
Пн 01 июн 2020 @ 12:36 Nikos Tsipinakis : > On 31/05, Lev Lamberov wrote: >> Please, finalize your work, add tags and ping me. I'll upload it to the >> Debian archive. > > Merged, tagged, and pushed. Should ready to be uploaded now. Thanks for your work! Just uploaded it. Cheers! Lev
Bug#961432: RFP: picom -- lightweight compositor for X11
On 31/05, Lev Lamberov wrote: > Please, finalize your work, add tags and ping me. I'll upload it to the > Debian archive. Merged, tagged, and pushed. Should ready to be uploaded now. - Nikos
Bug#961432: RFP: picom -- lightweight compositor for X11
Вс 31 мая 2020 @ 17:29 Nikos Tsipinakis : > On 31/05, Lev Lamberov wrote: >> Yep, but as I understand they are in situation where some distributions >> picked their fork at the times it was not renamed to picom. Now this >> causes troubles. So the rename and migration plan. Since in Debian we >> are starting from scratch, I don't think we need these hacks. Anyway, >> migrating from compton to picom will require manually installing a new >> package, so users are already know that they need to learn about that >> new thing and to change their configuration. Alternatively, I'd choose >> update-alternatives way, but since there are almost no alternatives in >> terms of maintained X11 compositors, I personally don't think it >> deserves any time investment. > > Makes sense, will leave as-is then. > >> Ouch! And tags are also missing from your repository. Since you use gbp, >> then gbp push is to the rescue. > > That's intentional, since I'm not sure which revision will end up uploaded > currently I haven't tagged it yet to avoid force updates. > >> Will look again at the picom package this evening. > > Looking forward to it :) So, I looked into the package. Did some tweaks to d/copyright, you'll find them in MR. I think the package is ready to be uploaded. In fact, it is quite good. Thanks for your contribution! Please, finalize your work, add tags and ping me. I'll upload it to the Debian archive. Congrats! Cheers! Lev
Bug#961432: RFP: picom -- lightweight compositor for X11
On 31/05, Lev Lamberov wrote: > Yep, but as I understand they are in situation where some distributions > picked their fork at the times it was not renamed to picom. Now this > causes troubles. So the rename and migration plan. Since in Debian we > are starting from scratch, I don't think we need these hacks. Anyway, > migrating from compton to picom will require manually installing a new > package, so users are already know that they need to learn about that > new thing and to change their configuration. Alternatively, I'd choose > update-alternatives way, but since there are almost no alternatives in > terms of maintained X11 compositors, I personally don't think it > deserves any time investment. Makes sense, will leave as-is then. > Ouch! And tags are also missing from your repository. Since you use gbp, > then gbp push is to the rescue. That's intentional, since I'm not sure which revision will end up uploaded currently I haven't tagged it yet to avoid force updates. > Will look again at the picom package this evening. Looking forward to it :) - Nikos
Bug#961432: RFP: picom -- lightweight compositor for X11
Вс 31 мая 2020 @ 13:27 Nikos Tsipinakis : > On 31/05, Lev Lamberov wrote: >> Good. Could you update your Salsa repository too? > > Whoops, forgot to push, updated with all the recent changes. Ouch! And tags are also missing from your repository. Since you use gbp, then gbp push is to the rescue. Cheers! Lev
Bug#961432: RFP: picom -- lightweight compositor for X11
Hi Nikos, Вс 31 мая 2020 @ 13:27 Nikos Tsipinakis : > On 31/05, Lev Lamberov wrote: >> Good. Could you update your Salsa repository too? > > Whoops, forgot to push, updated with all the recent changes. > >> Your d/watch needs some tweaks, because currently it detects 7.5 as the >> latest upstream version, where there is 8 (which you package). > > Fixed. > >> I'd recommend using pristine-tar. >> >> And I have a question. Why don't you import upstream versions as >> archives and not use upstream branch to track upstream master? The >> latter could make cherry-picking patches much more easy. > > This reminds me of the discussion on d-devel about the myriad ways of using > git > for debian patching. The disappointing answer is "that's the way I've done it > this far", however I haven't taken the time to explore all the different > workflows, which I do aim on doing soon. That's understandable and I'm not insisting on having upstream branch tracking upstream master. Whatever work for you. >> I: picom: spelling-error-in-binary usr/bin/picom everytime every time >> I: picom: spelling-error-in-manpage usr/share/man/man1/picom.1.gz everytime >> every time > > Fixed. > >> P: picom source: file-contains-trailing-whitespace debian/control (line 50) >> P: picom source: package-uses-old-debhelper-compat-version 12 >> P: picom source: rules-requires-root-missing > > Fixed. Cool! Thanks for your work! >> Also, do we really need to have symlinks (compton and compton-trans) >> and corresponding desktop files? Since it is a new Debian package, >> probably we can drop these. What do you think? > > You're right, for now they serve no purpose so I removed them. However, > upstream > seems to have a full migration plan from compton[1] and it looks like they do > intend on keeping backwards compatibility to some degree. So, it might be > worth > looking into the possibility of going through a migration to picom, given that > compton is unmaintained, and will inevitably bitrot. > > [1] https://github.com/yshui/picom/#migration Yep, but as I understand they are in situation where some distributions picked their fork at the times it was not renamed to picom. Now this causes troubles. So the rename and migration plan. Since in Debian we are starting from scratch, I don't think we need these hacks. Anyway, migrating from compton to picom will require manually installing a new package, so users are already know that they need to learn about that new thing and to change their configuration. Alternatively, I'd choose update-alternatives way, but since there are almost no alternatives in terms of maintained X11 compositors, I personally don't think it deserves any time investment. Will look again at the picom package this evening. Cheers! Lev
Bug#961432: RFP: picom -- lightweight compositor for X11
Hi Lev, On 31/05, Lev Lamberov wrote: > Good. Could you update your Salsa repository too? Whoops, forgot to push, updated with all the recent changes. > Your d/watch needs some tweaks, because currently it detects 7.5 as the > latest upstream version, where there is 8 (which you package). Fixed. > I'd recommend using pristine-tar. > > And I have a question. Why don't you import upstream versions as > archives and not use upstream branch to track upstream master? The > latter could make cherry-picking patches much more easy. This reminds me of the discussion on d-devel about the myriad ways of using git for debian patching. The disappointing answer is "that's the way I've done it this far", however I haven't taken the time to explore all the different workflows, which I do aim on doing soon. > I: picom: spelling-error-in-binary usr/bin/picom everytime every time > I: picom: spelling-error-in-manpage usr/share/man/man1/picom.1.gz everytime > every time Fixed. > P: picom source: file-contains-trailing-whitespace debian/control (line 50) > P: picom source: package-uses-old-debhelper-compat-version 12 > P: picom source: rules-requires-root-missing Fixed. > Also, do we really need to have symlinks (compton and compton-trans) > and corresponding desktop files? Since it is a new Debian package, > probably we can drop these. What do you think? You're right, for now they serve no purpose so I removed them. However, upstream seems to have a full migration plan from compton[1] and it looks like they do intend on keeping backwards compatibility to some degree. So, it might be worth looking into the possibility of going through a migration to picom, given that compton is unmaintained, and will inevitably bitrot. [1] https://github.com/yshui/picom/#migration - Nikos
Bug#961432: RFP: picom -- lightweight compositor for X11
Hi Nikos, Сб 30 мая 2020 @ 13:34 Nikos Tsipinakis : > On 26/05, Lev Lamberov wrote: >> Then you could compare your packages and somehow merge them, taking best >> pieces. > > I took a look at that package and cherry-picked some improvements from there, > also added Fritz to d/copyright. I think it's ready to be uploaded now, I've > put it on mentors[1]. > > Upstream symlinks compton to picom and also installs a compton.desktop file, > so > rather than override that I opted to set a Conflict/Replaces for compton. > > [1] https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/picom/picom_8-1.dsc Good. Could you update your Salsa repository too? Your d/watch needs some tweaks, because currently it detects 7.5 as the latest upstream version, where there is 8 (which you package). I'd recommend using pristine-tar. And I have a question. Why don't you import upstream versions as archives and not use upstream branch to track upstream master? The latter could make cherry-picking patches much more easy. There are some lintian stuff to deal with: lintian -L ">=pedantic" ../*.changes W: picom: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/compton W: picom: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/compton-trans I: picom: desktop-entry-lacks-icon-entry usr/share/applications/picom.desktop I: picom: spelling-error-in-binary usr/bin/picom everytime every time I: picom: spelling-error-in-manpage usr/share/man/man1/picom.1.gz everytime every time I: picom source: testsuite-autopkgtest-missing P: picom source: file-contains-trailing-whitespace debian/control (line 50) P: picom source: package-uses-old-debhelper-compat-version 12 P: picom source: rules-requires-root-missing At the very least, please, add the following changes: (1) migrate to debhelper-compat=13 (in d/control), (2) add Rules-Requires-Root: no (in d/control), (3) remove trailing whitespaces from d/*. Also, do we really need to have symlinks (compton and compton-trans) and corresponding desktop files? Since it is a new Debian package, probably we can drop these. What do you think? And I have not looked into d/copyright yet. Cheers! Lev
Bug#961432: RFP: picom -- lightweight compositor for X11
On 26/05, Lev Lamberov wrote: > Then you could compare your packages and somehow merge them, taking best > pieces. I took a look at that package and cherry-picked some improvements from there, also added Fritz to d/copyright. I think it's ready to be uploaded now, I've put it on mentors[1]. Upstream symlinks compton to picom and also installs a compton.desktop file, so rather than override that I opted to set a Conflict/Replaces for compton. [1] https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/picom/picom_8-1.dsc
Bug#961432: RFP: picom -- lightweight compositor for X11
Вт 26 мая 2020 @ 14:24 Nikos Tsipinakis : > On 26/05, Lev Lamberov wrote: >> Would be nice if you could work together on preparing picom for Debian. >> I propose Nikos to look at your current work and base on it. Then, >> please, let me know when you think it's ready, and I'll take a look. >> Please, keep me posted. > > That reached me a bit too late sadly, I've already used compton as a base to > get > a workable picom package. What remains now is the copyright file. The > complexity > here comes from the random spread of the 2 licenses. Some files are MIT from > the > compton authors, and others are MPL which is the license upstream uses now. > > Upstream uses 'SPDX-License-Identifier: [MPL-2.0 | MIT]' to specify the > license > for each file, sadly however licensecheck doesn't appear to recognize it. Then you could compare your packages and somehow merge them, taking best pieces. Cheers! Lev
Bug#961432: RFP: picom -- lightweight compositor for X11
On 26/05, Lev Lamberov wrote: > Would be nice if you could work together on preparing picom for Debian. > I propose Nikos to look at your current work and base on it. Then, > please, let me know when you think it's ready, and I'll take a look. > Please, keep me posted. That reached me a bit too late sadly, I've already used compton as a base to get a workable picom package. What remains now is the copyright file. The complexity here comes from the random spread of the 2 licenses. Some files are MIT from the compton authors, and others are MPL which is the license upstream uses now. Upstream uses 'SPDX-License-Identifier: [MPL-2.0 | MIT]' to specify the license for each file, sadly however licensecheck doesn't appear to recognize it.
Bug#961432: RFP: picom -- lightweight compositor for X11
Hi Fritz, Пн 25 мая 2020 @ 20:25 Fritz Reichwald : > I started to work on some packaging for it a month ago because I wanted > to try that particular piece of software. > > https://salsa.debian.org/fiete-guest/picom > > Still needs some work especially regarding the Licenses (looks not that > easy from my perspective) but works so far on my machine. > > Perhaps it helps with packaging it. Haven't looked for a sponsor by now. > But also working on other projects at the moment. Would be nice if you could work together on preparing picom for Debian. I propose Nikos to look at your current work and base on it. Then, please, let me know when you think it's ready, and I'll take a look. Please, keep me posted. Cheers! Lev
Bug#961432: RFP: picom -- lightweight compositor for X11
Hi Lev, I started to work on some packaging for it a month ago because I wanted to try that particular piece of software. https://salsa.debian.org/fiete-guest/picom Still needs some work especially regarding the Licenses (looks not that easy from my perspective) but works so far on my machine. Perhaps it helps with packaging it. Haven't looked for a sponsor by now. But also working on other projects at the moment. Best regards Fritz -- Fritz Reichwald Linux Consultant Tel: +49 160 8452444 Mail: reichw...@b1-systems.de B1 Systems GmbH Osterfeldstraße 7 / 85088 Vohburg / http://www.b1-systems.de GF: Ralph Dehner / Unternehmenssitz: Vohburg / AG: Ingolstadt,HRB 3537 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#961432: RFP: picom -- lightweight compositor for X11
Hi Nikos, Вс 24 мая 2020 @ 19:24 Nikos Tsipinakis : > My initial thought was that the compton maintainer should be the one to take > this over, but it looks like[1] compton was orphaned as its maintainer moved > on > to wayland. > > In which case, I'm interested in packaging this. Looks like picom changed significantly after forking from compton, so they even changed the name, in which case I believe that it should be a separate package. By the way, I can help with it to some extent, like sponsoring uploads. Cheers! Lev
Bug#961432: RFP: picom -- lightweight compositor for X11
retitle -1 ITP: picom -- lightweight compositor for X11 owner -1 thanks My initial thought was that the compton maintainer should be the one to take this over, but it looks like[1] compton was orphaned as its maintainer moved on to wayland. In which case, I'm interested in packaging this. - Nikos [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=960779
Bug#961432: RFP: picom -- lightweight compositor for X11
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist * Package name: picom Version : 8 Upstream Author : Yuxuan Shui * URL or Web page : https://github.com/yshui/picom * License : MIT, MPL-2.0 Programming Lang: C Description : lightweight compositor for X11 picom is a composition manager for the X11, which allows clients to modify what is drawn to the screen before it happens. This composition manager implements shadows, fading, proper translucency, and more. This is forked from the original compton (which in turn is forked from xcompmgr) because it seems to have become unmaintained.
