Re: liferea: diff for NMU version 1.8.6-1+nmu1

2012-11-10 Thread David Smith
 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

2012-11-10 Thread Paul Gevers
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)

2012-11-10 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
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]

2012-11-10 Thread Joachim Wiedorn
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]

2012-11-10 Thread David Prévot
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

2012-11-10 Thread Jakub Wilk

* 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

2012-11-10 Thread Giulio Paci
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]

2012-11-10 Thread Jakub Wilk

* 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.)

2012-11-10 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
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]

2012-11-10 Thread Vasudev Kamath
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