Re: liferea: diff for NMU version 1.8.6-1+nmu1
Why did you update libtool-dont-rearange-as-needed patch without any functional change? While inspecting / testing if it was still needed, I may have inadvertently updated the date on the file. No changes in the file, I have restored the original file in preparation for my next attempt. You did not allow the maintainer of this package much time to review most of your patches, but than again, this package has some history of new releases via NMU. Did you check the freeze policy [1]? The maintainer Luis Rodrigo Gallardo Cruz rodr...@debian.org. Is on the low-threshold list. So I figured I could save him some work by doing the NMU myself. Although, this is my first NMU. I thought it would be a good opportunity to learn the NMU process. Did you also try to fix the other important bugs? Did you comment on those? Yes and yes. Some of the other important bugs are very old (years) and I wasn't able to reproduce them. Some of them, I'm waiting for people to get back to me on if they still impact the latest version of liferea. The rest probably should be forwarded to upstream as I don't think it's an easy fix if they're still valid bugs. Are really all these bugs of the proper severity? I.e. bug 692007 does not seem to qualify in my view (although *you* marked it as important later, but when you submitted you did not think it important). You can try, but I am unsure if this would qualify for an unblock (maybe in addition to the rest). In my opinion, they are. Originally I was using this software with only a few feeds. When I added more feeds, I realized this was a more serious bug as it then started spamming the user's desktop with notifications on feeds that have already been read. Further, they keep triggering every refresh so it's pretty much endless. I suppose the user could just turn the notifications off for the app, but I thought it better to just fix it. Liferea is a news reader and people use it to get live updates to newstreams via RSS so I personally wouldn't use the package without the patch so I thought it should be important. Some of your patches change unnecessary things such as whitespace, capitalization or copyright dates. If I was release manager I would prefer you leave the changes to the functional parts. You can add the copyright notice with the date to the header of the patch instead, if you want. I think added comments to added code are fine. I pretty much took those slightly bloated (with comments/whitespace) patches directly from upstream. I wasn't sure if it was ok to simply not include parts of upstream patches. I could trim them down a bit and move the copyright to the patch header if that's preferred or makes it easier to see what has changed. Why add a patch that you don't use, probably a mistake. (google_source-*) Yes, mistake. I started a patch with that name, but then I imported the upstream patch file and just used that instead. Please add a nice patch header to all your patches [2]. OK, I will do this for my next attempt. Also, from IRC I was told: 1. NMU Version should be 1.8.6-1.1 which I will fix in my next attempt. 2. Was missing some # in the changelog for bug#s which I will fix for my next attempt. 3. I sent the bug report to the package itself using nmudif instead of to sponsorship-requests (using the mentors template) which I will fix for my next attempt. -- 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/201211101646.29588.sidic...@gmail.com
Re: liferea: diff for NMU version 1.8.6-1+nmu1
On 10-11-12 09:46, David Smith wrote: Why did you update libtool-dont-rearange-as-needed patch without any functional change? While inspecting / testing if it was still needed, I may have inadvertently updated the date on the file. No changes in the file, I have restored the original file in preparation for my next attempt. The following is noise: liferea-1.8.3.orig/ltmain.sh -+++ liferea-1.8.3/ltmain.sh +--- a/ltmain.sh b/ltmain.sh You did not allow the maintainer of this package much time to review most of your patches, but than again, this package has some history of new releases via NMU. Did you check the freeze policy [1]? The maintainer Luis Rodrigo Gallardo Cruz rodr...@debian.org. Is on the low-threshold list. So I figured I could save him some work by doing the NMU myself. Although, this is my first NMU. I thought it would be a good opportunity to learn the NMU process. Good. If you care for liferea, you could also propose to co-maintain it. Some of the other important bugs are very old (years) and I wasn't able to reproduce them. Please tag them as unreproducible [1] Some of them, I'm waiting for people to get back to me on if they still impact the latest version of liferea. I think you have tagged them with moreinfo, right? The rest probably should be forwarded to upstream as I don't think it's an easy fix if they're still valid bugs. So you have added this information as well. Don't hesitate to forward them (and tag them as such of course), but it would be nice to reproduce if possible. Are really all these bugs of the proper severity? I.e. bug 692007 does not seem to qualify in my view (although *you* marked it as important later, but when you submitted you did not think it important). You can try, but I am unsure if this would qualify for an unblock (maybe in addition to the rest). In my opinion, they are. Originally I was using this software with only a few feeds. When I added more feeds, I realized this was a more serious bug as it then started spamming the user's desktop with notifications on feeds that have already been read. Further, they keep triggering every refresh so it's pretty much endless. I suppose the user could just turn the notifications off for the app, but I thought it better to just fix it. Liferea is a news reader and people use it to get live updates to newstreams via RSS so I personally wouldn't use the package without the patch so I thought it should be important. I understand. It is just that the release-team might disagree. But off-course you can try. Next time, (or even now as a comment) add this kind of justification to the command where you raise the severity. Some of your patches change unnecessary things such as whitespace, capitalization or copyright dates. If I was release manager I would prefer you leave the changes to the functional parts. You can add the copyright notice with the date to the header of the patch instead, if you want. I think added comments to added code are fine. I pretty much took those slightly bloated (with comments/whitespace) patches directly from upstream. I wasn't sure if it was ok to simply not include parts of upstream patches. I could trim them down a bit and move the copyright to the patch header if that's preferred or makes it easier to see what has changed. The release team made it clear that changes should be clean, i.e. your changes of getting an unblock are higher if you remove everything that is not necessary. Why add a patch that you don't use, probably a mistake. (google_source-*) Yes, mistake. I started a patch with that name, but then I imported the upstream patch file and just used that instead. So remove it. :) 3. I sent the bug report to the package itself using nmudif instead of to sponsorship-requests (using the mentors template) which I will fix for my next attempt. But don't forget to update the bug report in the package with newer debdiff's nevertheless. I think sending it to the package is good. Sending it to mentors is also good, as you can not upload yourself. Question to mentors: should we use affects in this case, or does that not work? Paul [1] http://www.debian.org/Bugs/server-control#tag signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#692125: marked as done (RFS: raphael/2.1.0-1)
Your message dated Sat, 10 Nov 2012 13:16:06 +0100 with message-id CADk7b0Oi_SWUFzuKmPdTp=8p6qeHfx=b5ed4Onm+eWd=th8...@mail.gmail.com and subject line Re: Bug#692125: RFS: raphael/2.1.0-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #692125, regarding RFS: raphael/2.1.0-1 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 692125: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=692125 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package raphael. I upgraded it to the latest upstream release (2.1.0) and I made it lintian clean. To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/imagemagick Changes since the last upload: * New upstream release. Regards, Paolo Rotolo ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- Uploaded, thanks! ---End Message---
Bug#692923: RFS: chrony/1.24-3.2 [RC, NMU]
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: important Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package chrony (NMU). * Package name: chrony Version : 1.24-3.2 Upstream Author : Richard Curnow r...@rc0.org.uk * URL : http://chrony.tuxfamily.org/ * License : GPL-2 Section : admin It builds those binary packages: chrony - Sets your computer's clock from time servers on the Net To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/chrony Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/chrony/chrony_1.24-3.2.dsc Changes since the last upload: chrony (1.24-3.2) testing-proposed-updates; urgency=medium * Non-maintainer upload. * Fix: Remove obsolete test of kernel version (rtc_linux.c) to run for kernel versions 3.0 and higher. Nowadays all kernel versions have RTC support (solves #642209 for version 1.24). Closes: #642209 -- Joachim Wiedorn ad_deb...@joonet.de Sat, 10 Nov 2012 19:19:19 +0100 Regards, Joachim Wiedorn -- 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/20121110221039.649aa...@jupiter.home
Bug#692923: RFS: chrony/1.24-3.2 [RC, NMU]
Le 10/11/2012 17:10, Joachim Wiedorn a écrit : chrony (1.24-3.2) testing-proposed-updates; urgency=medium Please use 1.24-3.1+deb7u1 as a version number (and eventually directly “wheezy” instead of “testing-proposed-updates”). Since packages meant to testing-proposed-updates should be acknowledged by the release team prior to the upload, please do contact first the release-team (preferably via a bug report against release.debian.org) with a debdiff against the version in Wheezy. Regards David signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#684220: RFS: tinysvm/0.09-1 [ITP] -- SVM trainer and classifier toolkit
* Giulio Paci giuliop...@gmail.com, 2012-11-09, 00:56: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=466550 There is a very long discussion about Debian policy §4.9. All what I asked in my previous emails seems to have already been asked and discussed there. From what I read there, seems that the get-orig-source should download latest source and not the current source (that is what I implemented). I don't believe there's consensus that downloading newest-possible upstream version is the desired semantics. I think that downloading current version is more useful. And it doesn't matter that much, as long as there's an easy way to adapt the code to one's preferences. After all, this target is run by humans only. -- 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/20121110230203.ga1...@jwilk.net
Bug#684220: RFS: tinysvm/0.09-1 [ITP] -- SVM trainer and classifier toolkit
Il 11/11/2012 00:02, Jakub Wilk ha scritto: * Giulio Paci giuliop...@gmail.com, 2012-11-09, 00:56: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=466550 There is a very long discussion about Debian policy §4.9. All what I asked in my previous emails seems to have already been asked and discussed there. From what I read there, seems that the get-orig-source should download latest source and not the current source (that is what I implemented). I don't believe there's consensus that downloading newest-possible upstream version is the desired semantics. I think that downloading current version is more useful. And it doesn't matter that much, as long as there's an easy way to adapt the code to one's preferences. After all, this target is run by humans only. Ok, so I will leave it as it is right now (if there are not other issue about my implementation of get-orig-source). -- 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/509ee5ae.5040...@gmail.com
Bug#683184: RFS: suckless-tools/39-1 [ITA]
* Vasudev Kamath kamathvasu...@gmail.com, 2012-11-10, 11:28: debian/watch contains only a single line version=3? Is that intentional? As far as I can see, this change is not documented in the changelog. Yes file is introduced to suppress the lintian warning. Do you think I need to remove that file? Nah, keep it. A comment inside the watch file explaining that it's intentionally defunct would be helpful. But now that the change is included in the changelog, I can live without it. At least for lsw, dmenu and tabbed, copyright statement in d/copyright don't match those in LICENSE files. Please update the copyright file. Fixed It's getting better. :) tabbed/LICENSE has 2009-2011 Enno Boland, but it's only 2009-2010 in d/copyright. DEP-5 says License names are case-insensitive, and may not contain spaces and There are many versions of the MIT license. Please use Expat instead, when it matches. -- 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/2012003828.ga4...@jwilk.net
Bug#678500: marked as done (RFS: cppreference-doc/20120620-1 [ITP] -- C and C++ standard library reference manual for English language.)
Your message dated Sun, 11 Nov 2012 04:20:30 + with message-id e1txp26-0004o3...@quantz.debian.org and subject line closing RFS: cppreference-doc/20120620-1 [ITP] -- C and C++ standard library reference manual for English language. has caused the Debian Bug report #678500, regarding RFS: cppreference-doc/20120620-1 [ITP] -- C and C++ standard library reference manual for English language. to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 678500: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=678500 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package cppreference-doc. It contains a downloaded copy of a free online wiki [1] that specializes in C and C++ reference and scripts for converting it to formats suitable for offline viewing (these are executed at build time). Almost identical package has been maintained in my Ubuntu personal package archive [2] for over half year. The scripts are maintained here [3]. The debian packaging is maintained here [4]. The upstream tarball is released once in several months and can be obtained here [5]. [1] - http://en.cppreference.com/w/ [2] - https://launchpad.net/~p12/+archive/ppa [3] - https://github.com/p12tic/cppreference-doc [4] - https://github.com/p12tic/cppreference-doc-debian [5] - http://en.cppreference.com/w/Cppreference:Archives --- General information --- * Package name: cppreference-doc * Version : 20120620-1 * Upstream Author : Cppreference contributors (content), p12 tir...@yahoo.co.uk (packaging) * URL : http://en.cppreference.com/w/Cppreference:Archives * License : various: CC-BY-SA / GDFL, CC-BY-SA, GPL-3+ (see debian/copyright for more details) * Section : doc It builds those binary packages: * cppreference-doc-en - C++ standard library reference manual for English language * cppreference-doc-en-html - C and C++ standard library reference manual for English language * cppreference-doc-en-qch - C++ standard library reference manual for English language To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/cppreference-doc Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/cppreference-doc/cppreference-doc_20120620-1.dsc Thank you, p12 ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- Package cppreference-doc has been removed from mentors.---End Message---
Bug#683184: RFS: suckless-tools/39-1 [ITA]
On 01:38 Sun 11 Nov , Jakub Wilk wrote:
* Vasudev Kamath kamathvasu...@gmail.com, 2012-11-10, 11:28:
debian/watch contains only a single line version=3? Is that
intentional? As far as I can see, this change is not documented
in the changelog.
Yes file is introduced to suppress the lintian warning. Do you
think I need to remove that file?
Nah, keep it. A comment inside the watch file explaining that it's
intentionally defunct would be helpful. But now that the change is
included in the changelog, I can live without it.
OK :)
At least for lsw, dmenu and tabbed, copyright statement in
d/copyright don't match those in LICENSE files. Please update
the copyright file.
Fixed
It's getting better. :)
tabbed/LICENSE has 2009-2011 Enno Boland, but it's only
2009-2010 in d/copyright.
Eh I missed it writing copyright is really boring ;-)
DEP-5 says License names are case-insensitive, and may not contain
spaces and There are many versions of the MIT license. Please use
Expat instead, when it matches.
Done changed to Expat License.
--
Vasudev Kamath
http://copyninja.info
Connect on ~friendica: copyninja@{frndk.de | vasudev.homelinux.net}
IRC nick: copyninja | vasudev {irc.oftc.net | irc.freenode.net}
GPG Key: C517 C25D E408 759D 98A4 C96B 6C8F 74AE 8770 0B7E
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
