Re: RFS: flare
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 3:15 AM, Jan-Hendrik (hennr) Peters wrote: Yes I asked the game team, no response so I came back here. Hmm, are you sure you did? I'm not seeing your mail in the debian-devel-games archives. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caktje6g-efmc7bjqdsknd-vndd-hbvr4pqkq1srbx-lax1h...@mail.gmail.com
RFS: acsccid
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package acsccid. This release is to fix lintian warnings on copyright. * Package name: acsccid Version : 1.0.2-3 Upstream Author : Advanced Card Systems Ltd. * URL : http://acsccid.sourceforge.net/ * License : LGPL-2.1+ Section : libs It builds those binary packages: libacsccid1 - PC/SC driver for ACS USB CCID smart card readers To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/acsccid Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/a/acsccid/acsccid_1.0.2-3.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards, Godfrey Chung
Re: RFS: acsccid
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2011-09-20 09:14, Godfrey Chung wrote: I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. according to http://packages.qa.debian.org/a/acsccid/news/20110818T224710Z.html, this package has already been uploaded two days ago :-) but maybe this is only some mail delay... fgmasdr IOhannes -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk54RUkACgkQkX2Xpv6ydvRgggCgisuu8TKlkTq6xEEDfU3dkf6n sKQAoNs7evzugxsZBKY87CUdYfmKIndq =LCqR -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: RFS: flare
On 08/22/2011 07:47 PM, Jan-Hendrik (hennr) Peters wrote: Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package flare. It's a diablo like rpg game with complete free art and code. This is my first package, hope it's ok ;) See details: * Package name: flare Version : 0.14.1-1 Upstream Author : Clint Bellanger * URL : http://clintbellanger.net/rpg/ * License : GPL and CC-BY-SA Section : games To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/flare Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/f/flare/flare_0.14.1-1.dsc Hi, I have no intention of sponsoring this game, I think it's best if I leave this task to people from the Game team, however, I had a quick look out of curiosity. I wanted to know what type of game it was, but ... I couldn't tell by just reading the description. Description: FOSS single-player 2D action RPG engine First, in your short description, remove FOSS. OF COURSE this is a free and open source software, absolutely all software in Debian are, but we don't write FOSS in all short descriptions of all packages. Then, your long description reads: snip Flare is not a reimplementation of an existing game or engine. It is a tribute to and exploration of the action RPG genre. . Rather than building a very abstract, robust game engine, the goal of this project is to build several real games and harvest an engine from the common, reusable code. The first game, in progress, is a fantasy dungeon crawl. . Flare uses simple file formats (INI style config files) for most of the game data, allowing anyone to easily modify game contents. Open formats are preferred (png, ogg). The game code is C++ and is released under the GPL v3; the game art is CC-BY-SA 3.0 /snap Your long description doesn't tell at all what type of game it is. It tells about the engine which is used, what type of config files the project users, and what license the software is being released in. Is this a game??? Now that I read the long description, I have doubts. So, please rewrite completely the short and long description take care of the following: - do not tell about any copyright thing, everything about that should be written in debian/copyright, that's the only place where it belongs - write it for people like me: who don't know anything about the project, or any other types of games. I might well not know what RPG means, but I should still be able to understand what I'm going to download. Please do not write a Diablo like game, because people (like me) might not know Diablo (in fact, that's why I was curious: I wanted to know what Diablo was...). - by reading the long desc. I should be able to know a lot already about what my gaming experience with flare, and what to expect. - do not write about the config files, that's something that should go into the README.Debian or something similar (somewhere in /usr/share/doc/flare, in the manpage, or something like that...). Also, in your debian/copyright, you attempted to use the DEP5 format, and you did a good formatting for the GPL-3.0+ license. I guess you took that from another package, right? But later, on your CC-BY-SA-3.0 license is not well formatted, it goes below the 80th column, has blank lines, etc. It would be also great to mention http://clintbellanger.net/contact.php, which is the way to contact the author. There might be other issues, I didn't look further. Thanks for your contribution to Debian, Thomas Goirand (zigo) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e7847b4.7050...@debian.org
Re: RFS: acsccid
Dear IOhannes My package is 1.0.2-3 and not 1.0.2-2. Regards Godfrey -Original Message- From: IOhannes m zmoelnig Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 3:48 PM To: debian-mentors@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: RFS: acsccid -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2011-09-20 09:14, Godfrey Chung wrote: I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. according to http://packages.qa.debian.org/a/acsccid/news/20110818T224710Z.html, this package has already been uploaded two days ago :-) but maybe this is only some mail delay... fgmasdr IOhannes -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk54RUkACgkQkX2Xpv6ydvRgggCgisuu8TKlkTq6xEEDfU3dkf6n sKQAoNs7evzugxsZBKY87CUdYfmKIndq =LCqR -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/E30D4BF9E0334905BA5DDB6FB7E14D68@GODFREYPC
Re: RFS: flare
Hi Paul, hi *, Am Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:03:26 +0800 schrieb Paul Wise p...@debian.org: On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 3:15 AM, Jan-Hendrik (hennr) Peters wrote: Yes I asked the game team, no response so I came back here. Hmm, are you sure you did? I'm not seeing your mail in the debian-devel-games archives. maybe the debian games team has too many mailing lists :-) http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-games-devel/2011-August/019720.html best regards, Matthias -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110920110923.4c121...@localhost.aus.der.hoelle
Re: RFS: flare
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 5:09 PM, Matthias Schmitz matth...@sigxcpu.org wrote: maybe the debian games team has too many mailing lists :-) http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-games-devel/2011-August/019720.html That would be the bugs list, I doubt many people read it. I haven't had time to do so for at least 5 months. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caktje6fhcvpkort0afpsaqidugtgobu_afia98s9omkgmib...@mail.gmail.com
Re: RFS: acsccid
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2011-09-20 10:26, Godfrey Chung wrote: Dear IOhannes My package is 1.0.2-3 and not 1.0.2-2. oops, sorry about that. i checked and double checked before writing the email, but obviously was unprepared that the mentors.d.n would give me both versions on one page, so obviously i checked against the wrong version. probably it would have been good to clarify this in the RFS (you did mention the changes, but about 90% of the email is rather generic, so i missed that line also) fgamsdr IOhannes -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk54YuIACgkQkX2Xpv6ydvStigCgkBchWuhEm6ZopM8cDhkGnQSe CVwAoLHCvEWt+tuQJ+by5tRZpsuqv0fv =wKu0 -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: RFS: decibel-audio-player (Adoption, new upstream release)
On 09/20/2011 06:26 AM, Leonardo Marín wrote: Hi, This was what I did, ljmarin@LM trunk $ svn diff Index: debian/control === --- debian/control(revisión: 7520) +++ debian/control(copia de trabajo) @@ -4,11 +4,12 @@ Maintainer: Leonardo Marín leojma...@gmail.com Uploaders: Python Applications Packaging Team python-apps-t...@lists.alioth.debian.org Build-Depends: debhelper (= 8.0.0) -Build-Depends-Indep: python (=2.4), python-support +Build-Depends-Indep: python (= 2.6.6-3~) For what reason do you need that exact specific version of Python? Cheers, Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e788a8e.3040...@debian.org
Re: RFS: decibel-audio-player (Adoption, new upstream release)
[Thomas Goirand, 2011-09-20] On 09/20/2011 06:26 AM, Leonardo Marín wrote: ljmarin@LM trunk $ svn diff Index: debian/control === --- debian/control (revisión: 7520) +++ debian/control (copia de trabajo) @@ -4,11 +4,12 @@ Maintainer: Leonardo Marín leojma...@gmail.com Uploaders: Python Applications Packaging Team python-apps-t...@lists.alioth.debian.org Build-Depends: debhelper (= 8.0.0) -Build-Depends-Indep: python (=2.4), python-support +Build-Depends-Indep: python (= 2.6.6-3~) For what reason do you need that exact specific version of Python? python binary package provides dh_python2 helper and that's why Leonardo bumped minimum required python version. See also http://wiki.debian.org/Python/TransitionToDHPython2 -- Piotr Ożarowski Debian GNU/Linux Developer www.ozarowski.pl www.griffith.cc www.debian.org GPG Fingerprint: 1D2F A898 58DA AF62 1786 2DF7 AEF6 F1A2 A745 7645 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110920131352.gb16...@piotro.eu
Re: RFS: decibel-audio-player (Adoption, new upstream release)
On 09/20/2011 09:13 PM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: python binary package provides dh_python2 helper and that's why Leonardo bumped minimum required python version. See also http://wiki.debian.org/Python/TransitionToDHPython2 Thanks for the pointer. However, I don't understand this: All packages that use the same namespace have to be converted at the same time. Be sure to use Breaks or Depends relationships to ensure you cannot mix installation of python-support-based packages with dh_python2-based ones. Can you explain, or even better, enhance the wiki so that you wont have to explain to another person? Cheers, Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e78de1d.7080...@goirand.fr
Re: RFS: pygame
Hi, Vincent Cheng vincentc1...@gmail.com writes: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/pygame/pygame_1.9.1release-2.dsc Your changes look okay, but could you please document the copyright holder and license for freesansbold.ttf[1]? You might also want to change Debian GNU/Linux systems to just Debian systems in d/copyright (yes, nitpicking ;) ). Why do you use version mangling to remove release from the Debian version in debian/watch? You could just include it in the regexp matching the upstream version. The VCS also does not seem to contain the current package. Regards, Ansgar [1] The FTP team requires all files in the source package to be documented. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/878vpjkq9y@deep-thought.43-1.org
Re: RFS: sigit
Hello again Den 18-09-2011 01:08, Jakub Wilk skrev: * Jakub Wilk jw...@debian.org, 2011-09-18, 00:46: To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/sigit Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sigit/sigit_0.3.2-3.dsc I can't download your source package: $ dget -q http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sigit/sigit_0.3.2-3.dsc curl: (22) The requested URL returned error: 404 dget: curl sigit_0.3.2.orig.tar.gz http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sigit/sigit_0.3.2.orig.tar.gz failed But I can download the missing .orig.tar.gz from the archive, so never mind... Sorry, I wasn't aware of this. I reuploaded with -sa. Why did you override ancient-autotools-helper-file? Upstream did rip the autotools helper files from autotools but they are modified and the package does not really use autotools, so updating the helper files will just break his configure-script. Thus the warnings does not really make sense. Why did you override debian-rules-ignores-make-clean-error? Lintian is correct here. I do no longer ignore make clean errors. I run make distclean only if Makefile exists (thus a previous build was done/tried). I don't understand what #641573 has to with multi-arch. It looks more like a problem with using --as-needed for linking, which is BTW (thankfully!) not the default in Debian. Neither do I. It seems to either affect only Ubuntu or affect Debian in special cases (perhaps when using multiarch, which I am not). I did implement the change as it seems to fix the bug in Ubuntu and certainly should not hurt. What do you mean by * Fix various lintian errors.? That's not a helpful changelog entry... Sorry, too brief, I agree. I have updated the changelog entry. Reuploaded: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sigit/sigit_0.3.2-3.dsc Oh, sorry for my double post and silence - my mentors-mails ended in a non-subscribed IMAP folder. Best regards and TIA /Rasmus -- Rasmus Bøg Hansen || http://www.zz9.dk/ mo...@zz9.dk || -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e78e425.1030...@zz9.dk
RFS: glipper
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package glipper. * Package name: glipper Version : 2.1-1 Upstream Author : Laszlo Pandy laszl...@gmail.com * URL : https://edge.launchpad.net/glipper * License : GNU GPL v2 Section : utils It builds those binary packages: glipper- Clipboard manager for GNOME To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/glipper Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/glipper/glipper_2.1-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards, -- José Ernesto Dávila Pantoja Licenciado en Computación - Ubuntu Member Ubuntu User #395356 GNU/Linux User #18273 Blog: http://josernestodavila.blogspot.com/ Fingerprint: 42F6 CCA0 22B2 B64C 131D AA9C 5943 CDFE 99BC D948 - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/cagcdknb-414yavpw3carsstmsli0ygxvhfrz3ff1qn3nq-w...@mail.gmail.com
Re: RFS: decibel-audio-player (Adoption, new upstream release)
On Sep 21, 2011, at 02:40 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote: Thanks for the pointer. However, I don't understand this: All packages that use the same namespace have to be converted at the same time. Be sure to use Breaks or Depends relationships to ensure you cannot mix installation of python-support-based packages with dh_python2-based ones. Can you explain, or even better, enhance the wiki so that you wont have to explain to another person? It's because of the way namespace packages __init__.py files are handled. Until PEP 382 or 402 lands (which won't help Python 2 at all), you have package collisions for namespace __init__.py files. Each Python packaging regime has its own way of handling this and you don't want conflicting regimes or you're just asking for trouble. Thus all packages which share a namespace must use the same Python helper. I updated the wiki. -Barry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110920151433.2a356...@resist.wooz.org
RFS: glipper
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package glipper. * Package name: glipper Version : 2.1-1 Upstream Author : Laszlo Pandy laszl...@gmail.com * URL : https://edge.launchpad.net/glipper * License : GNU GPL v2 Section : utils It builds those binary packages: glipper- Clipboard manager for GNOME To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/glipper Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/glipper/glipper_2.1-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards, -- José Ernesto Dávila Pantoja Licenciado en Computación - Ubuntu Member Ubuntu User #395356 GNU/Linux User #18273 Blog: http://josernestodavila.blogspot.com/ Fingerprint: 42F6 CCA0 22B2 B64C 131D AA9C 5943 CDFE 99BC D948 - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/cagcdknbj9_ydyz+xx70hdjalc-jpz0ehbv1rebcd7zc9oah...@mail.gmail.com
Re: RFS: sigit
* Rasmus Bøg Hansen mo...@zz9.dk, 2011-09-20, 21:06: Why did you override ancient-autotools-helper-file? Upstream did rip the autotools helper files from autotools but they are modified and the package does not really use autotools, so updating the helper files will just break his configure-script. Will it? From what I can see, they are just old versions of the GNU scripts, but maybe I'm missing something. If upstream actually did modify them... well, that's crazy. BTW, license and copyright holders of these files are not documented in debian/copyright. Thus the warnings does not really make sense. As far as I can see, the config.guess is not run at all in our case, and config.sub results are not used for anything utile. So while the override is indeed justified here, I'd rather learn these things from a comment in the override file, not from inspecting the source. I don't understand what #641573 has to with multi-arch. It looks more like a problem with using --as-needed for linking, which is BTW (thankfully!) not the default in Debian. Neither do I. It seems to either affect only Ubuntu or affect Debian in special cases (perhaps when using multiarch, which I am not). I did implement the change as it seems to fix the bug in Ubuntu and certainly should not hurt. One thing is implementing a change that doesn't hurt, another thing is misrepresenting reasons for it in the changelog. Some other things: Please consider using a patch system. The current monolithic diff.gz makes it hard to understand what changes you made to upstream source and why. debian/rules uses DEB_BUILD_GNU_TYPE and DEB_HOST_GNU_TYPE without defining them. While dpkg-buildpackage defines them for you, you should not rely it. -- Jakub Wilk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110920202540.ga...@jwilk.net
Re: RFS: glipper
Jose Ernesto Davila Pantoja josernestodav...@ubuntu.com writes: I am looking for a sponsor for my package glipper. * Package name: glipper Version : 2.1-1 Upstream Author : Laszlo Pandy laszl...@gmail.com * URL : https://edge.launchpad.net/glipper * License : GNU GPL v2 Section : utils A few nitpickings from the sideline, if you don't mind (IANADD applies, and so on and so forth): * It would perhaps be a good idea to add a few more headers to debian/patches/01_license-headers.patch, like fill in the Author field, or add Origin: Upstream CVS or somesuch, to make it even clearer where it comes from. * debian/copyright has this text: This package was debianized by Neil Williams li...@codehelp.co.uk on Thu, 14 Sep 2006 11:40:26 +0100. The current Debian maintainer is Davide truffa dav...@catoblepa.org This is obviously not the case, as the package is currently orphaned, and the changelog closes the appropriate bug too, so the current maintainer should be updated (by mentioning all former maintainers too, preferably). * debian/glipper.NEWS Why do you think that upstream NEWS (at least, that's what it seems to me) belong to debian/glipper.NEWS? Such dependency changes, I believe, are not interesting to end users, the package manager does the right thing with those. Unless this breaks existing functionality, or has other unexpected side-effects the users should be aware of, I do not think it's worthwile to bother people who upgrade the package with it. And even if it has unexpected side-effects, then those should be mentioned, not the dependency change. For a mere user, that means nothing. * debian/rules Very minor nitpicking, but... it's not a sample debian/rules anymore ;) Aaand that's all the nitpickings I could find with a quick look. Quite little, and most of it cosmetic. Good luck with finding a sponsor, and hope that my comments will be useful! -- |8] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87y5xj6ibi@luthien.mhp
Re: RFS: pygame
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 2:44 AM, Ansgar Burchardt wrote: Your changes look okay, but could you please document the copyright holder and license for freesansbold.ttf[1]? Looks like lib/freesansbold.ttf constitutes a GPL violation since this is one of the fonts from the GNU FreeFont project, which is GPLed and the source code for it is Fontforge .sfd files, which are not available in pygame. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAKTje6HLZa77VyXwt8uwj7-q8wx=pz2nhdnceqr5abp0kkz...@mail.gmail.com
RFS: devilspie
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package devilspie. * Package name: devilspie Version : 0.22-2 Upstream Author : Ross Burton r...@debian.org * URL : http://burtonini.com/blog/computers/devilspie/ * License : GPL-2 Section : gnome It builds those binary packages: devilspie - find windows and perform actions on them To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/devilspie Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/devilspie/devilspie_0.22-2.dsc This upload fixes two FTBFS [1][2], fixes a whole lot of lintian problems, and updates some rather aged packaging. [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=638991 [2] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=554305 I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards, Andreas Rönnquist -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e7950e3.7050...@gusnan.se
flashcache - call for resolution / seeking for a mentor
Dear Debian community, Please let me start from expressing my appreciation to your collective work and effort. I am very grateful to the very existence of Debian which brought years of sanity and ethics to my everyday work. I am indebted to you for the the great system so wonderfully and universally flexible. For years I've been using Debian thinking that one day I might be joining the family and have a chance to contribute. So perhaps like many people before me I picked a software which I need as a matter of urgency and packaged it for Debian only to find unhappy maintainer who was doing similar work but (arguably) didn't yet made as much progress. My bad, I should have find him and coordinate the effort but as a newcomer I'm lacking some understanding of how things suppose to be done and hence I missed the chance to reduce our efforts. At this point my package is ready for review and as I'm been told, I'm neither suppose to close someone else's ITP nor submit a duplicate one. No doubts in the end there should be only one package left. It is indeed possible that something can be merged between those two packages. (As a matter of fact, maintainer who first logged an ITP already integrated some pieces of my work into his unfinished package) By the maintainer of the unfinished package (Arno Töll) I have been told that my only option is to merge with him but not the other way. However there are a few reasons why I don't like the idea of merging with unfinished package at the moment: * Because I'm using the software I packaged, I will have to maintain a working package until a suitable alternative will be available in Debian. * Because it might be feasible to merge the other way and having my package a primary one. (In this case there might be less work to do) * Because there are some technical differences, notably in version numbering etc. * Because we disagree on Release early, release often practice, which may be considered a reasonable approach for the packages in review especially when someone like myself need it right away. * Because I'm using fossil http://fossil-scm.org/ (git may be an overkill just for several files) and merging to git will require a substantial effort for me. * Because it seems wrong to made a decision about who should merge with who merely by the ITP announcement date and not by the technical examination. And hence here are my questions: * Is it true that whoever happen to create an ITP first gets the monopoly for packaging? * What if he is not doing the best job? * Can we call for a resolution based on technical examination rather than on who submitted an ITP first? * What if maintainer responsible for ITP failed to deliver a solution (for whatever reason) when working alternative is available? * Would it be reasonable to reject the work purely because another ITP is already there? * If ITP always have priority, aren't we sending a wrong message for ambitious maintainers who might be tempted to create ITP early in order to secure the rights for packaging, disregarding of how close they are to providing a usable package? There must be a similar situations in the past so it will be nice to know about resolution. Maybe one day I will become a Debian Maintainer, but for a moment I'm just doing my first steps to this direction. I'm doing my best with this packaging work (and so does the other guy, I'm sure). I'm highly motivated because I'm using the software I packaged myself. I submitted a minor patch to upstream and it have been merged into master tree. I am nobody and I have neither reputation nor experience, but It appears to me that I'm doing a slightly better job with my packaging of Flashcache which is a write-back block device cache (made as device-mapper pass-through device) for accelerating disks with intermediate cache located on faster block device such as SSD. So here am I asking for a favor: Could someone please kindly have a look at the package I've made (and provide comments)? As a future maintainer I need to understand the best practice and technical issues of my package disregarding of the possible merge. I'm not asking to upload because of the politics involved, yet it would be nice to hear a respected developer's comment about this situation. It would also be nice to have a quick unbiased comparison between mine and Arno's work. The package I need someone to look at is flashcache uploaded to mentors.debian.net If interested you can read our gory discussion with honorable Arno Töll in ITP #635504 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=635504 You can find Arno's work on flashcache here: http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=collab-maint/flashcache.git;a=summary Please excuse me for the troubles. (I don't have any understanding of co-maintainer's rights and duties yet.) I hope some answers will help me to clarify the confusion and get the better
Re: RFS: devilspie
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Andreas Rönnquist wrote: Upstream Author : Ross Burton r...@debian.org * URL : http://burtonini.com/blog/computers/devilspie/ Ross looks inactive upstream too: http://git.gnome.org/browse/devilspie/log/ Since he doesn't use it any more I would suggest that you take over upstream too. Once that is done I would suggest changing the Homepage link to the wiki page at live.gnome.org. At the very least your two patches should get into the git.gnome.org repo. Probably it will also need some updates for GTK+ 3 and or GNOME 3. In any case I have built, tested, signed and uploaded the package. There is plenty of stuff listed on the PTS page for next time you want to work on devilspie. There is also one lintian warning still: W: devilspie: manpage-has-errors-from-man usr/share/man/man1/devilspie.1.gz 34: warning: macro `SYMBOL' not defined -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAKTje6F4CzuoBAr84PTO6aa6pYhap47wbe5eLO+6=D=ay9h...@mail.gmail.com
RFS: libapache2-mod-socket-policy-server (an Apache2 module for serving Adobe socket policy files)
libapache2-mod-socket-policy-server is an Apache2 module for serving Adobe socket policy files. The module installs painlessly. If desired, the module can be enabled or disabled for each virtual host. If desired, a different socket policy can be served for each virtual host. The default socket policy is the most restrictive socket policy possible. The socket policy can easily be changed. The module is relatively simple, is written in C using the APR libraries, is well-documented, and is licensed under the Apache License Version 2.0. The package is ready for sponsorship and can be downloaded from: http://socketpolicyserver.com Any questions, please let me know! -- Daniel Kauffman Lead Developer Rock Solid Solutions, LLC 877.239.9195 toll-free 208.699.9699 mobile -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e796ccd.4000...@rocksolidsolutions.org
