Re: intent to orphan zynaddsubfx
2012/7/27 Bart Martens : > On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 10:01:08AM +0200, Alessio Treglia wrote: >> > I intend to orphan zynaddsubfx. Before doing that I invite two additional >> > DD's >> > to confirm that they agree with this intent with ma...@debian.org in cc. >> >> the D-Multimedia-M team is already on it. > > Was this agreed with the maintainer ? I may have overlooked that. Maybe, for > clarity, you could submit an ITA bug explaining that the maintainer agreed to > hand over maintenance to the D-Multimedia-M team. Hello, I has been in contact with Eduardo Macan and he agreed that me and D-Multimedia-M team will take care about zynaddsubfx. I didn't submit an ITA bug because package haven't been orphaned. I already working on it , but I am not hurrying because freeze time ;) http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-multimedia/zynaddsubfx.git;a=shortlog regards mira -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAG_ZyaDrn5=11iqu7thfpawgcrqu7-so57yzpt7w+h2df7x...@mail.gmail.com
Re: "unblock" vs "freeze exception" usertags [Was: Bits from the nippy Release Team]
On 07/27/2012 11:08 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On Fri, 2012-07-27 at 15:42 -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: >> On Fri, 27 Jul 2012, Adam D. Barratt wrote: >>> bug - "reportbug release.debian.org" and selecting the "unblock" option >>> will set the correct usertags for you. >> >> what is the difference between those two user tags and if there is any >> should I >> retag freeze-exception ones as unblock? > > I think the original intention was that an unblock request was for a > package that followed the freeze policy whereas an exception was for > packages that required, well, an exception. Hopefully someone who was > more involved at the time will correct me if I'm mistaken. Indeed, that was the initial intention. The idea was that less active members could easily help with unblock requests while freeze exceptions could need more time to review and to follow afterwards so could be skipped by release team members who did not have the necessary time to do them. In practice it has never been used in that way though. > In terms of those processing the requests for wheezy, the basic answer > is "absolutely nothing". Indeed, there's been suggestions of dropping > the f-e tag. In practice the same was true for earlier releases. Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5013080b.8090...@debian.org
Re: "unblock" vs "freeze exception" usertags [Was: Bits from the nippy Release Team]
On Fri, 2012-07-27 at 15:42 -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: > On Fri, 27 Jul 2012, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > bug - "reportbug release.debian.org" and selecting the "unblock" option > > will set the correct usertags for you. > > what is the difference between those two user tags and if there is any should > I > retag freeze-exception ones as unblock? I think the original intention was that an unblock request was for a package that followed the freeze policy whereas an exception was for packages that required, well, an exception. Hopefully someone who was more involved at the time will correct me if I'm mistaken. In terms of those processing the requests for wheezy, the basic answer is "absolutely nothing". Indeed, there's been suggestions of dropping the f-e tag. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1343423304.18013.34.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: RFC: Why are so many debian packages outdated?
]] Svante Signell > I have tried several times and I can give you a recent example, see > #610209 and especially #669368. I have tried to contribute, but to no > avail (at least in this case). None of them are particularly relevant for the release, AFAICS? As for packaging them in experimental, yes, I could do that, but it's more effort, etc and I have better places to spend that extra effort. mlocate isn't a package which I'd be likely to stage in experimental for some random changes. -- Tollef Fog Heen UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/878ve52dmd@vuizook.err.no
"unblock" vs "freeze exception" usertags [Was: Bits from the nippy Release Team]
On Fri, 27 Jul 2012, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > bug - "reportbug release.debian.org" and selecting the "unblock" option > will set the correct usertags for you. what is the difference between those two user tags and if there is any should I retag freeze-exception ones as unblock? 3 freeze-exception Freeze exceptions 9 unblock unblock requests I had been filing under freeze-exception... and reportbug has the same handling for both, http://wiki.debian.org/bugs.debian.org/usertags is silent about them... thanks in advance for clarification -- Yaroslav O. Halchenko Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences Dartmouth College, 419 Moore Hall, Hinman Box 6207, Hanover, NH 03755 Phone: +1 (603) 646-9834 Fax: +1 (603) 646-1419 WWW: http://www.linkedin.com/in/yarik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120727194236.gd16...@onerussian.com
Re: RFC: Why are so many debian packages outdated?
]] Michael Gilbert > True. Part of the problem is appropriate terminology. This is a case > of what I would call an "undermaintained" package. Even though the > maintainer is still around, and may be quite active elsewhere, this > package has not gotten any attention in 2 years (even though multiple > upstreams have been released in the meantime). They've mostly been translation updates, which aren't particularly important. Updating them, while nice, is hardly critical. -- Tollef Fog Heen UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87a9yl2dsc@vuizook.err.no
Re: intent to orphan zynaddsubfx
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 10:01:08AM +0200, Alessio Treglia wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 7:58 AM, Bart Martens wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I intend to orphan zynaddsubfx. Before doing that I invite two additional > > DD's > > to confirm that they agree with this intent with ma...@debian.org in cc. > > the D-Multimedia-M team is already on it. Was this agreed with the maintainer ? I may have overlooked that. Maybe, for clarity, you could submit an ITA bug explaining that the maintainer agreed to hand over maintenance to the D-Multimedia-M team. Regards, Bart Martens -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120727184247.gf14...@master.debian.org
Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers
> The Fungi writes: > On 2012-07-26 14:29:14 +0100 (+0100), Ian Jackson wrote: >> We also need a general word for "someone involved with Debian in a >> positive way". "Participant" is clumsy; "member of the community" >> even more so. "Person" might do but word with a more positive spin >> would be nice. > As a long-time participant and non-DD, I've always liked the term > "contributor" in that context. As (hopefully) one of the affected, I'm fine with “contributor.” -- FSF associate member #7257 http://sf-day.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/86wr1puk4q.fsf...@gray.siamics.net
Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)
Cyril Brulebois writes ("Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to
mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)"):
> Ian Jackson (26/07/2012):
> > Uploaders needs to be abolished in favour of multiple
> > Maintainers. In wheezy perhaps ?
>
> I'm pretty sure the answer is no.
Uh, yes. I miswrote. I'd intended "wheezy+1".
Ian.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20498.35938.892096.94...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
Re: RFC: Why are so many debian packages outdated?
On Vi, 27 iul 12, 09:52:41, Svante Signell wrote: > > OK, I'll try to help with Wheezy. Where can I find the complete list of > RC bugs? You could start with rc-alert (in devscripts) and then continue with http://bugs.debian.org/release-critical/ Hope this helps, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: RFC: Why are so many debian packages outdated?
On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 09:52:41 +0200 Svante Signell wrote: > On Fri, 2012-07-27 at 08:24 +0100, Neil Williams wrote: > > Look at the list of RC bugs and see if you can come up with anything > > useful about the problem. There are enough of them, everyone should be > > able to do something about some of them. > > OK, I'll try to help with Wheezy. Where can I find the complete list of > RC bugs? Thanks! :-) $ rc-alert (tells you about RC bugs in packages you actually have installed and which, therefore you may care about / want fixed / be able to check if the bug still exists). Part of the devscripts package. http://www.debian.org/Bugs/ http://bugs.debian.org/release-critical/ http://udd.debian.org/bugs.cgi http://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals http://wiki.debian.org/HowtoUseBTS http://wiki.debian.org/DropProblemPackages http://qa.debian.org/ http://wiki.debian.org/BSP/BeginnersHOWTO I'm sure there are plenty of other resources. Maybe arrange a BSP yourself? (or encourage someone near you to arrange it.) Join #debian-bugs on IRC, maybe mentors.debian.net & associated list & IRC channel if you're not familiar with changing packages - but fixing RC bugs doesn't have to involve anything except interacting with the BTS. Don't forget that leaf packages with no reverse dependencies can be removed if that is the most appropriate way to deal with the RC bug and asking for removal is an action on the BTS, not the package. http://wiki.debian.org/ftpmaster_Removals http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#archive-manip http://qa.debian.org/howto-remove.html -- Neil Williams = http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/ pgpkfcys7W0cq.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: intent to orphan zynaddsubfx
Hi, On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 7:58 AM, Bart Martens wrote: > Hello, > > I intend to orphan zynaddsubfx. Before doing that I invite two additional > DD's > to confirm that they agree with this intent with ma...@debian.org in cc. the D-Multimedia-M team is already on it. Cheers! -- Alessio Treglia | www.alessiotreglia.com Debian Developer | ales...@debian.org Ubuntu Core Developer| quadris...@ubuntu.com 0416 0004 A827 6E40 BB98 90FB E8A4 8AE5 311D 765A -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAMHuwow2a3hraqXDOV5jV5f40F7khdospzN=srGxP1ErKk=g...@mail.gmail.com
Re: RFC: Why are so many debian packages outdated?
On Fri, 2012-07-27 at 08:24 +0100, Neil Williams wrote: > On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 01:20:24 +0200 > Svante Signell wrote: > > > On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 15:58 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > > Michael Gilbert writes: > > > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 6:09 PM, Russ Allbery wrote: > > ... > > > > This would be a case where I think liberal NMUing would certainly be > > > > appropriate (of course prior to the freeze). > > > > > > Yeah, I guess that makes sense, *if* the person doing the NMU then owns > > > any bugs they introduce and of course doesn't do anything drastic like > > > rewriting the build system. And provides plenty of warning. > > > > Please, what can I do being a _contributor_ compared to these "high > > level package maintainers", except filing bug reports. Please advice a > > stupid user who just wants to be using Debian as a GNU/* release(and > > having recent software in them) . > > Change tack. > > Look at the list of RC bugs and see if you can come up with anything > useful about the problem. There are enough of them, everyone should be > able to do something about some of them. OK, I'll try to help with Wheezy. Where can I find the complete list of RC bugs? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1343375561.16717.153.camel@x60
Re: RFC: Why are so many debian packages outdated?
On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 01:20:24 +0200 Svante Signell wrote: > On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 15:58 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > Michael Gilbert writes: > > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 6:09 PM, Russ Allbery wrote: > ... > > > This would be a case where I think liberal NMUing would certainly be > > > appropriate (of course prior to the freeze). > > > > Yeah, I guess that makes sense, *if* the person doing the NMU then owns > > any bugs they introduce and of course doesn't do anything drastic like > > rewriting the build system. And provides plenty of warning. > > Please, what can I do being a _contributor_ compared to these "high > level package maintainers", except filing bug reports. Please advice a > stupid user who just wants to be using Debian as a GNU/* release(and > having recent software in them) . Change tack. Look at the list of RC bugs and see if you can come up with anything useful about the problem. There are enough of them, everyone should be able to do something about some of them. Can you reproduce it? Can you identify anything about why it happens? Can you clarify that it really is the fault of the specified package and not due to some other package? Can you add anything about workarounds or possible solutions? Just reading the LONG list of RC bugs would be something. It would occupy your time much more usefully than that little button marked "Send". Out of date packages in Wheezy *do not matter* because it's too late now. Do something to help get Wheezy out by helping to fix RC bugs! That will gain you merit which will be useful when we can do something about new upstream releases - AFTER our own release. -- Neil Williams = http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/ pgpC4YNOrKlVr.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFC: Does anyone remember there's a release of our own to get out?
On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 19:51:58 -0400 Michael Gilbert wrote: > On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 6:58 PM, Russ Allbery wrote: > >> True. Part of the problem is appropriate terminology. This is a case > >> of what I would call an "undermaintained" package. Even though the > >> maintainer is still around, and may be quite active elsewhere, this > >> package has not gotten any attention in 2 years (even though multiple > >> upstreams have been released in the meantime). > > > > Putting aside this specific example, I don't think the criteria you're > > using to evaluate whether a package is undermaintained is valid. It's not > > always correct that maintainers should be blindly packaging every upstream > > release, and if upstream releases are minor and not important to Debian, > > it's perfectly reasonable to not prioritize that packaging among the > > various other things that one is doing. > > Agreed. Disagree - and it's pointless to argue about this during a freeze when we can do nothing about it. > It is more complicated than just length of time without an > upload ... when a new upstream release exists ... and a bug report asking for the new release has been open for at least half the length of time specified ... ... and the maintainer hasn't commented on the bug report about why the new upstream release might be unsuitable for Debian ... and Debian is not or will not soon be in a release freeze >, but that is a very straightforward quantity to look up and > keep track of. New upstream releases come with *risks* and need *testing*. Panicking about new upstream releases shortly before or during a release freeze is a complete waste of everyone's time! There are very good reasons why the release team do not like to see new upstream releases being uploaded around the time of or during a release freeze. All this is quite apart from the fact that we have a *lot* of packages which are native or where the DD *is* the upstream. We also have a lot of packages where the previous upstream is all but inactive and it is only the maintainer pushing patches upstream which even gets a new release considered. Please can we put this argument off until after Wheezy and concentrate on things which will actually help get this release out? Please? Pretty please with bells on? (If encouragement doesn't work, maybe if everyone interested in the release puts everyone who is not interested in the release in their kill files / banned them from the lists & BTS, then we'd get some work done.) The longer we take to release Wheezy, the more out of date Wheezy will be when it is released. The more untested software gets rushed into Wheezy, the more RC bugs will occur and the longer it will take to release. *THIS IS SELF-DEFEATING!* We know this, we've been here before - WHY must we keep on repeating this? If everyone commenting on this RFC actually fixed an RC bug instead, we'd actually be able to DO something about this problem because we'd be able to make the release and then upload stuff for testing! If you're not interested in helping Debian release Wheezy, fine, please do the rest of us a favour and put your favourite pet peeve onto a Wiki page and let's discuss it after the release. I don't mind if you personally don't want to see the release get done but don't block / distract those of us who do care. Some of us are relying on getting the release done. If you're not helping the release, please don't become part of the problem. Let the rest of us get some work done without pointless distractions about things which are not going to help the release! > If one sees a package that has not been uploaded in 2 years (or 6 > months or however long), I think we should make it so that they can > feel free to liberal NMU it with a 10-day delay. If the maintainer > was really planning to hold the package back for some reason, they can > always cancel that (preferably with some kind of note as to why). No. The maintainer block on a new upstream release should be via a bug report, not having to respond to an unwanted NMU. IMHO NMU's are not a wise choice for new upstream releases anyway, not least because the person doing the NMU really cannot be expected to be as familiar with the possible breakages as the maintainer - also because the "patch" is usually meaningless. During a release freeze, this whole argument is even more pointless because there is *nothing* the release team are going to want to do with new upstream releases whilst frozen. I really am beginning to wonder if the privilege of being able to post to this list should be conditional on the number of RC bug fixes made by that person since the freeze started. Come on people, we have a release to do. There are enough people to fix all the RC bugs, if we all tried to fix one / two each. Instead it's left to a handful of stressed-out individuals. Honestly, complaining about upstream releases being too tardy to be included and thereby *delaying our own
