Re: Watch file warning from mentors website
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 26/02/13 18:56, Bart Martens wrote: The redirector githubredir is obsolete, because github allows uscan now. It's possible that githubredir is still documented in some versions of man uscan. You can choose to add a comments-only watch file or to leave out the watch file and ignore the lintian message. Excellent. I'll change the githubredir to github and leave the other comments. Thanks for the quick and comprehensive response. - -- Regards, Scott Leggett. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJRLGuRAAoJEHlzKPr+55fVOWsP/jnxmfQsuSPn9CHpCq/iiaii r9+Sm8veQt7IymjSPaiRVtlHeKGEk0outx6BDCJoErfMWD0XjaIWdT9UwhsOwSQZ AD/adB5lqE14CP19WS/OOXjxPU0dg99b+RF1vnV2zG99BTbuNGKYmkygctFoP0iP lNdOxqNrticOMljcmrhBU2yBy7vrcvv6pM2mn7Z3gOQ+b4yxhsZVhe7ubgv18oPw yDoVfcAyPFYP/PX/aiPLMoQLPwg4Zsv1mb0ExGlTBEtbXBdEn6Z8RspltLDA7Xhf X8pHvG3+hvgDVdpC70J7uPz0ZZ15L70e0//ijwh6mJ5d7oar5m1qMfNlgSemiWIA GyC6A7pEW8xr8sbPu5ggkbyeNdeLecnd9wyCiVUNuBC6tQ2kRJCG+Sw5EyAIUSuz 8KNjXryUhm98yVHe85i4mexE0VsoEaA1fSWOt7Kv//vHs4SgU8adEqPOr+SDSC06 9QGRP8MrydEZqF2uuMR7Ob6Bfxx+Ajkf9ZVxKw87bRcyz/vHpdK3gOn8/naxG8Hg XLUR8U60oyDjmh0J5ntpYBfgkDB7QAgXd5t0rJxQEmYSdilnWnZKY1orlohTx2bC Hi8AP+zdLrrtKDIBSouhwRQhqi0RIbfrpPnSxZYiIeVxnt0UKd8aL5lkm9sUVPZP gXciaXvCjgAmjh2P7dw2 =eJPK -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/512c6b92@sl.id.au
Re: RFS: libengsas packages
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 06:58:22PM +0100, Anton Gladky wrote: On 02/25/2013 05:37 PM, Andrew Shadura wrote: 6) Copyright-file must be in DEP-5 format. Please don't say 'must' when you're speaking about what's actually a recommendation, not a rule. Thanks. ok, agree, my typo. But I think it is desirable to ask for DEP-5 for new uploads. In addition it is not even possible to use DEP-5 for every case. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-games/2013/02/msg00065.html is a recent example where a license cannot be reformatted to fit into DEP-5, because it expressly prohibits modification. (I have to admit that this is non-free.) For future reviews, maybe you can ask Why are you not using DEP-5? as a means of clarification instead. Sometimes the maintainer will simply be not aware of it and at other times you will likely receive a reason. In the still a bit distant future it might be interesting to add a pedantic lintian check for DEP-5 usage. The reason for not using DEP-5 could then be documented in a canonical place: the overrides file. Helmut -- 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/20130226075611.GA25880@localhost
Re: RFS: libengsas packages
Le Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 08:56:11AM +0100, Helmut Grohne a écrit : On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 06:58:22PM +0100, Anton Gladky wrote: On 02/25/2013 05:37 PM, Andrew Shadura wrote: 6) Copyright-file must be in DEP-5 format. Please don't say 'must' when you're speaking about what's actually a recommendation, not a rule. Thanks. ok, agree, my typo. But I think it is desirable to ask for DEP-5 for new uploads. In addition it is not even possible to use DEP-5 for every case. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-games/2013/02/msg00065.html is a recent example where a license cannot be reformatted to fit into DEP-5, because it expressly prohibits modification. (I have to admit that this is non-free.) Hi all, in case of Steam, I do not think that including a copy of the license in a debian copyright file following the machine-readable format constitutes an alteration of the license. First, the original file in the sources is unmodified. Second, indentation and escape of empty lines is not a modification of the license, but a formatting to allow the retreival of the pristine text using dedicated software. For instance, the tool config-edit displays license texts after converting them back to plain text. Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- 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/20130226083157.ga23...@falafel.plessy.net
Bug#701693: RFS: compton/0.0.1+git-2182505-2013-02-05-1 [ITP]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package compton * Package name: compton Version : 0.0.1+git-2182505-2013-02-05-1 Upstream Author : Christopher Jeffrey chjjeff...@gmail.com * URL : https://github.com/chjj/compton * License : X/MIT Section : x11 It builds those binary packages: compton- Compositor for X11, based on xcompmgr To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/compton Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/compton/compton_0.0.1+git-2182505-2013-02-05-1.dsc More information about compton can be obtained from: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Compton Changes since the last upload: compton (0.0.1+git-2182505-2013-02-05-1) experimental; urgency=low * Imported Upstream version 0.0.1+git-2182505-2013-02-05 * Override dh_auto_clean to quiet verbose build warnings. * Initial release (Closes: #679551) -- Scott Leggett sc...@sl.id.au Tue, 26 Feb 2013 17:13:22 +110 - -- Regards, Scott Leggett. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJRLIZnAAoJEHlzKPr+55fVG/gQAKf4Fa2gLFPjSOMnErbfTLOs jiqXQiSyjNL8CySk1dE2ubnt/yXEbT1qHqjoHnDdPwI6fRHFTqltvSiX1NvK83Oz KFJh46B7euVvBuLO4uJA2iIpDr89ciAMk18ZFlwkM4cmDuINdBY+bCuP5PaYT0MC 28kfphbONvTbkvqB2HPgMdVugfZv2raXzNEZuRowMCPTlMsFn+aI5lEt4mh3b+eB vX5pWj6OJ5ESvvm117ETv4OyDVeKwroQwLa6huL/A2hjohGbPgBtntfBwAqkWAvQ Qn1G+vttUGqVcWv27tp1DHxpunY19lddv60RSPUqCmOqd6QJPbIm/WISXq+JTT8L PgRcNwBPgNVG2Vag8CYlWs7w4/KPtFjekkYukE1GFLyAHzlLhA36/aM94BlAOyUn eQEYGqZ0MefwXgGl/iwHaJDt56YNFCeOJ31oa/i0y5RNwQTj2ie5Q97niyKMCMpj 67qPMOzWZfF5SihXK2c5BLo46m+V/crddtR79Tep7iIpPN9fm8viKKLWo3S61dcY 1hCBbhqfZcUlXmAwcuBVona7QrNrq8kmjFWYyRMtUPZu5lVtXYFM8Bgus72AHnI5 rTRf8yVNbXtHi3y6oZFvml5mtPG5cB+IhMJIfM/ulpw79/I0hxbl75OjbsIze6L7 rZDLv4FlmSSAZ2Wrln4S =Y8w0 -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/512c8671.9080...@sl.id.au
Why is it so hard to get sponsors.....?
Hi, I have 2 packages for which I request sponsoring. http://mentors.debian.net/package/jabberd2 Bug #698547 http://mentors.debian.net/package/jabber-muc Bug #698548 But until now nobody seemed to be interested in sponsoring them. I got messages not familiar with these packages or something like that. In the past I had some other packages and also had problems to get a sponsor. Why is it so hard to get a sponsor? Greetings, Willem signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Why is it so hard to get sponsors.....?
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 03:09:04PM +0100, Willem van den Akker wrote: Hi, I have 2 packages for which I request sponsoring. http://mentors.debian.net/package/jabberd2 Bug #698547 http://mentors.debian.net/package/jabber-muc Bug #698548 But until now nobody seemed to be interested in sponsoring them. I got messages not familiar with these packages or something like that. In the past I had some other packages and also had problems to get a sponsor. Yeah, me too. Even as a sponsored uploader a DM. Why is it so hard to get a sponsor? While this isn't true of the general case, which I think there's valid concern about, it is currently during freeze, most DDs are working on RC bugs :) Some sponsorship does still go on -- perhaps you could ask some of the DDs who maintain jabber servers -- the ejabberd folks or so, or the xmpp team. Also, the jabberd2 package in the PTS[1] has Debian XMPP team on maintainer. Are there no DDs willing to sponsor a routine upload there? Greetings, Willem Cheers, Paul [1]: http://packages.qa.debian.org/j/jabberd2.html -- .''`. Paul Tagliamonte paul...@debian.org : :' : Proud Debian Developer `. `'` 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87 `- http://people.debian.org/~paultag signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Why is it so hard to get sponsors.....?
On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 15:09:04 +0100, Willem van den Akkerwvdak...@wilsoft.nl wrote: Hi, I have 2 packages for which I request sponsoring. http://mentors.debian.net/package/jabberd2 Bug #698547 http://mentors.debian.net/package/jabber-muc Bug #698548 But until now nobody seemed to be interested in sponsoring them. I got messages not familiar with these packages or something like that. In the past I had some other packages and also had problems to get a sponsor. Why is it so hard to get a sponsor? If I am reading your (big) changelogs correctly, you are (amongst other things) switching patch-system to quilt, and package new upstream versions - This is a big no-no for the release team during the freeze (see [1]) which we have had since June [2]. This might lower the chances of getting a DD to sponsor your packages during the freeze. [1] http://release.debian.org/wheezy/freeze_policy.html [2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2012/06/msg9.html -- Andreas Rönnquist mailingli...@gusnan.se gusn...@gusnan.se -- 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/20130226154001.2add4...@debian.lan
Bug#701739: RFS: rrep/1.3.4-1
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package rrep * Package name: rrep Version : 1.3.4-1 Upstream Author : Arno Onken asn...@asnelt.org * URL : http://sourceforge.net/projects/rrep/ * License : GPL-3.0+ Section : utils It builds these binary packages: rrep - recursive pattern replacement utility The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix Bug#701416: rrep: ftbfs with eglibc-2.17. The bug was fixed upstream by using a more recent version of GNU Gnulib. To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/rrep Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/rrep/rrep_1.3.4-1.dsc More information about rrep can be obtained from http://sourceforge.net/projects/rrep/ Changes since the last upload: * New upstream release (Closes: #701416) * Changed Build-Depends debhelper to = 9. * Changed debian/compat to 9. * Updated Standards-Version to 3.9.4. * Fixed copyright license text. * Changed Maintainer to Upstream-Contact field. * Updated Format field. Regards, Arno Onken -- 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/512ce563.5020...@asnelt.org
Bug#701668: RFS: medit/1.1.1-1 [ITA] -- Useful programming and around-programming text editor
Hi Jose, thanks for adopting this package. You have done a good job on packaging and I have not found there any critical errors there. So I uploaded that. But there are a couple of fix, which, please, prepare for your next upload: 1) Add CVS for packaging (preferable Alioth-services). 2) Consider DEP-5 for copyright-file. 3) dh_checkbuildlog in debian-directory, seems is not used, right? Please remove it then. 4) Add a couple of DEP-3 headers for the patch. 5) CFLAGS and LDFLAGS in debian/rules are injected manually. Are they not picked up from environment? 6) Why are auto-tests blocked? Please, use VCS not to loose previous states of the package. Best regards, Anton On 02/25/2013 10:12 PM, Jose G. López wrote: Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package medit * Package name: medit Version : 1.1.1-1 Upstream Author : Yevgen Muntyan emunt...@users.sourceforge.net Daniel Poelzleithner mooe...@poelzi.org * URL : http://mooedit.sourceforge.net/ * License : GNU Lesser General Public License Section : editors It builds those binary packages: medit - Useful programming and around-programming text editor To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/medit Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/medit/medit_1.1.1-1.dsc Changes since the last upload: medit (1.1.1-1) experimental; urgency=low * New maintainer (Closes: #575203). * New upstream release. * debian/compat: update to 9. * debian/control: - Update to debhelper 9. - Bump to Standards-Version 3.9.4. No changes required. - Add dh-autoreconf to Build-Depends to update the build system. * debian/rules: - Add '--parallel' compilation. - Rewrite to get rid of unnecessary dependencies and add hardening flags. * Add fix_package_name.patch to change program name from medit-1 to medit. * Add doc-base control files to register documentation with doc-base. * Add a menu file. Regards, Jose G. López signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Why is it so hard to get sponsors.....?
While this isn't true of the general case, which I think there's valid concern about, it is currently during freeze, most DDs are working on RC bugs :) Ok. Some sponsorship does still go on -- perhaps you could ask some of the DDs who maintain jabber servers -- the ejabberd folks or so, or the xmpp team. Also, the jabberd2 package in the PTS[1] has Debian XMPP team on maintainer. Are there no DDs willing to sponsor a routine upload there? Yes I already emailed and pinged the XMPP group. Also the uploaders. No-one answered. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#701668: marked as done (RFS: medit/1.1.1-1 [ITA] -- Useful programming and around-programming text editor)
Your message dated Tue, 26 Feb 2013 22:25:45 +0100 with message-id 512d2859.8040...@debian.org and subject line Re: Bug#701668: RFS: medit/1.1.1-1 [ITA] -- Useful programming and around-programming text editor has caused the Debian Bug report #701668, regarding RFS: medit/1.1.1-1 [ITA] -- Useful programming and around-programming text editor 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.) -- 701668: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=701668 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 medit * Package name: medit Version : 1.1.1-1 Upstream Author : Yevgen Muntyan emunt...@users.sourceforge.net Daniel Poelzleithner mooe...@poelzi.org * URL : http://mooedit.sourceforge.net/ * License : GNU Lesser General Public License Section : editors It builds those binary packages: medit - Useful programming and around-programming text editor To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/medit Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/medit/medit_1.1.1-1.dsc Changes since the last upload: medit (1.1.1-1) experimental; urgency=low * New maintainer (Closes: #575203). * New upstream release. * debian/compat: update to 9. * debian/control: - Update to debhelper 9. - Bump to Standards-Version 3.9.4. No changes required. - Add dh-autoreconf to Build-Depends to update the build system. * debian/rules: - Add '--parallel' compilation. - Rewrite to get rid of unnecessary dependencies and add hardening flags. * Add fix_package_name.patch to change program name from medit-1 to medit. * Add doc-base control files to register documentation with doc-base. * Add a menu file. Regards, Jose G. López signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- Hi Jose, thanks for adopting this package. You have done a good job on packaging and I have not found there any critical errors there. So I uploaded that. But there are a couple of fix, which, please, prepare for your next upload: 1) Add CVS for packaging (preferable Alioth-services). 2) Consider DEP-5 for copyright-file. 3) dh_checkbuildlog in debian-directory, seems is not used, right? Please remove it then. 4) Add a couple of DEP-3 headers for the patch. 5) CFLAGS and LDFLAGS in debian/rules are injected manually. Are they not picked up from environment? 6) Why are auto-tests blocked? Please, use VCS not to loose previous states of the package. Best regards, Anton On 02/25/2013 10:12 PM, Jose G. López wrote: Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package medit * Package name: medit Version : 1.1.1-1 Upstream Author : Yevgen Muntyan emunt...@users.sourceforge.net Daniel Poelzleithner mooe...@poelzi.org * URL : http://mooedit.sourceforge.net/ * License : GNU Lesser General Public License Section : editors It builds those binary packages: medit - Useful programming and around-programming text editor To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/medit Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/medit/medit_1.1.1-1.dsc Changes since the last upload: medit (1.1.1-1) experimental; urgency=low * New maintainer (Closes: #575203). * New upstream release. * debian/compat: update to 9. * debian/control: - Update to debhelper 9. - Bump to Standards-Version 3.9.4. No changes required. - Add dh-autoreconf to Build-Depends to update the build system. * debian/rules: - Add '--parallel' compilation. - Rewrite to get rid of unnecessary dependencies and add hardening flags. * Add fix_package_name.patch to change program name from medit-1 to medit. * Add doc-base control files to register documentation with doc-base. * Add a menu file. Regards, Jose G. López signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ---End Message---
Re: Why is it so hard to get sponsors.....?
If I am reading your (big) changelogs correctly, you are (amongst other things) switching patch-system to quilt, and package new upstream versions - This is a big no-no for the release team during the freeze (see [1]) which we have had since June [2]. This might lower the chances of getting a DD to sponsor your packages during the freeze. [1] http://release.debian.org/wheezy/freeze_policy.html [2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2012/06/msg9.html I understand [1] and [2]. I meant uploading to unstable and not testing. But none of the DD was ever answering the emails..
Re: Why is it so hard to get sponsors.....?
Hi, On 26.02.2013 22:31, W. van den Akker wrote: I understand [1] and [2]. I meant uploading to unstable and not testing. But none of the DD was ever answering the emails.. Be patient and don't give up. I know this can be frustrating and annoying, and we're slowly trying to improve the situation, but we all agree the situation is still all but optimal to sponsorees. Moreover, personally I'm always keen to hear about ideas how to improve the situation though. So let us know if you got good ideas. -- with kind regards, Arno Töll IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#698547: Comments on package
Hi Willem, thanks for adopting these the package. But there are some questions/notes regarding it: 1) Remove quilt and hardening-includes from BD, they are useless there. 2) Vcs-Browser: ;a=summary is not needed. 3) Convert copyright file into DEP-5 format. 4) debian/docs is not used? If so - remove it. 5) debian/rules: a) lines 10..20 can be removed due to dh 9. b) rules can be shortened in several times, if you replace old targets with dh_override*. See man dh. Most of stuff can just be dropped. c) lines 24..30. Are they really necessary? If not - remove them, d) $(CONFIGURE_EXTRA_FLAGS). Where are they defined? e) lines 91..97 can be replaced by jabberd2.install file. f) Why lintian-overrides in line 99 installs explicitly. 6) the target distribution for such uploads should be set experimental due to a freeze-period. 7) debian/changelog should be shortened. Lines 9 and 35 can be together, line 37 useless, lines 13 and 21 can be dropped. Please, check other entries. It seems, your second package jabber-muc has the same issues. Please, review and fix especially debian/rules. Anyway, you have done a great job. If you fix those issues, I think, your package can be uploaded into experimental. It is highly desirable, if it will be done by Debian XMPP Maintainers. Anton signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Why is it so hard to get sponsors.....?
On 26/02/13 21:51, Arno Töll wrote: Hi, On 26.02.2013 22:31, W. van den Akker wrote: I understand [1] and [2]. I meant uploading to unstable and not testing. But none of the DD was ever answering the emails.. Be patient and don't give up. I know this can be frustrating and annoying, and we're slowly trying to improve the situation, but we all agree the situation is still all but optimal to sponsorees. Moreover, personally I'm always keen to hear about ideas how to improve the situation though. So let us know if you got good ideas. While harsh reality dictates that sponsors will spend their time however they wish, including only sponsoring packages that interest them or have some other relevance, it might be more encouraging if sponsorees could know where they stand apart from the wall of silence we have now. First - a weighted sponsorship priority queue - all packages get a rating and higher-rated packages will get sponsored sooner than others. Everyone who wants a sponsor for a package will see their package, its position in the queue, and its weighting. Your call is important to us - you are 15th in the queue is better than please hold. Second - a weighting web interface - even if a sponsor can't/wont sponsor a package they can rate it positively or negatively. This would take seconds with the right web interface, comments optional. Third, unless a package reaches some negative weighting value which marks it as un-sponsor-able, it will eventually get packaged. This way, sponsors get to package what they like most of the time, with the occasional package they might prefer not to, for Debians sake. Regards, Philip Ashmore -- 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/512d401f.2070...@philipashmore.com
Bug#700360: RFS: openfst/1.3.3-1 -- weighted finite-state transducers library
Il 25/02/2013 23:50, Jakub Wilk ha scritto: * Giulio Paci giuliop...@gmail.com, 2013-02-23, 19:37: I just sent another email further explaining the issue and pointing out it is a general issue. Thanks. I think this change * Move plugins from /usr/lib/fst/ to /usr/lib/fst/1/. warrants updating README.Debian. Updated. -- 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/512d7185.3030...@gmail.com
Bug#690049: marked as done (RFS: sylkserver/2.1.1-1 [ITP])
Your message dated Wed, 27 Feb 2013 04:20:26 + with message-id e1uayvg-0002an...@quantz.debian.org and subject line closing RFS: sylkserver/2.1.1-1 [ITP] has caused the Debian Bug report #690049, regarding RFS: sylkserver/2.1.1-1 [ITP] 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.) -- 690049: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=690049 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package sylkserver * Package name: sylkserver Version : 2.1.1-1 Upstream Author : AG Projects * URL : http://www.ag-projects.com * License : GPL v3 Section : net It builds those binary packages: sylkserver - Extensible SIP/XMPP Application/Conferencing Server sylkserver-sounds - Extensible SIP/XMPP Application/Conferencing Server To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/sylkserver Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sylkserver/sylkserver_2.1.1-1.dsc Regards, Daniel Pocock -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJQdCqDAAoJEOm1uwJp1aqDBRcP/07uTqAjKJZisgYSyQs4/A4c hApgEv7YsZeQ6B0oCXGS+OsdyJYe54UQsaCBVT5iEJzxmSubtw0xNeWma5uRHTCS gZfZOaicmhPEhIfvFN818exAWIO3vcMrL1RYlQakqnseugK04M16umUdRHzlpoW6 UdMyaBwN2tmunzSpcPQ20wAP/yj6Dnym/pHnI8gffkOWoCTWlIg6+Z2wwrrTgO0C X5BsI2GcVDdeNrCORVfUFFhlcC7c9sGC4ha0NYIhO+Nz9BETU4SYqg/RfztRXSL3 KW6hSG2FM9viBnLgDsh/rZ/rKO1shkx9p1byIlp/H50vUxzBhU+/XNR6CJAnOKK8 OmsnABp+/aUBsTd8hgYI+GSOFBPsZIyfNuIyqwN/e4TDHZihNJeYNXsHSeLh4UxV 4oxXMDE4gbCxElPvzg8T4bmvxLyzD7ra7WRkRpGdyMyRPZgQGsFFrHhG6stWAdqt nFy+NqFILXl6GsNUL4h/YTcyR0So+2Dk3T2mff4cJhh7GRNSflm/hj7nTuN+X214 9PnzyNnhy8PVdUJkB2DGH2zhYTlROq+7Uv8KyS/+5ys+By3TqyZ/5QJ5jN608shM rsgVWKz1R8MG/FfKqvvFIS6g1PZuvY/OlwbICXUSC2mRLJo35R2mddb/mf7wV1VA CtfNswLHtEjWaaorFkYN =BrOt -END PGP SIGNATURE- ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- Package sylkserver has been removed from mentors.---End Message---
Re: Why is it so hard to get sponsors.....?
Here is a hopefully comprehensive, general answer to this question, not specific to your situation: Freeze: During the release freeze, most Debian folks are focussed on getting the release out. Fixing RC bugs, fixing important bugs, doing upgrade testing, writing release notes, finalising the installer and live CDs. All these things are a higher priority than sponsoring packages that fix non-RC issues. Volume: There are not enough Debian contributors to package every piece of software nor enough Debian members to sponsor every package made by Debian contributors. This has always been the case and always will be the case, there is just so much free software out there and probably many more Debian contributors than Debian members. Time: Sponsorship is hard work and is a large time investment. Some Debian members might not have enough Debian time to do it at all and others might prefer to spend their time on doing work that they signed up to do, like maintian infrastructure or packages they are a maintainer for. Specialization: Debian contributors generally work on stuff they use or are otherwise are interested in. This can limit the scope of software that gets sponsored. With well-functioning teams, it can also mean that software for a specific area is well covered with sponsorship, debian-med is a good example. Unfortunately can mean Preferences: Different folks have different packaging preferences, some like cdbs, some debhelper, some dh, some yada. Your packaging choices will in part reduce the set of folks Responsibility: Sponsors take responsibility for your upload. Some folks might not want to take this responsibility on, if they didn't check the upload quite well enough and later it was discovered to contain malicious or buggy code, it would be their fault. This scares some people away from doing sponsorship. Some folks are scared of uploading new packages in case it turns out the contributor will disappear after one upload. Infrastructure: In the past we had pretty poor ways of matching packages to be sponsored with potential sponsors based on the above criteria. This is improving with the new developments in mentors.d.n but still needs work (AFAIK). Emphasis: From memory, when I joined, sponsorship wasn't emphasised quite as much as other activities in Debian, so less folks considered taking it on at all. This may have changed already or perhaps we need to adjust our new-member documents. More: We have had this discussion many times over the years, you might want to look at the archives for this list to find out some more reasons for the general lack of sponsors or for fleshing out the above reasons. Increasing your chances: Keep trying! Don't stop after a month of not being able to find a sponsor. Continue maintaining the package on mentors.d.n/etc and you can increase sponsors confidence in your abilities and your committment to Debian. Relationships with sponsors. It is easier to get sponsored by someone who already knows your work from another area in Debian, like core software (dpkg/apt/gcc/etc), core QA infrastructure (the PTS, DDPO, etc), the website or other areas. If you are able to, come to DebConf and meet the folks who could potentially sponsor your packages. Increase the quality of your package. Check it against various checklists. Check it with various automatic tools like lintian. Look at the PTS page for your package and at the links on that page. Do reviews for other folks looking for sponsorship and ask them to review your package in return. http://wiki.debian.org/SponsorChecklist http://wiki.debian.org/LucaFalavigna/NEWChecklist http://ftp-master.debian.org/REJECT-FAQ.html http://wiki.debian.org/HowToPackageForDebian#Check_points_for_any_package http://mentors.debian.net/intro-reviewers More tips listed in the FAQ: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMentorsFaq#Where_else_can_I_get_a_sponsor.3F http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMentorsFaq#What_happens_if_I_can.27t_find_a_sponsor.3F -- 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==s-epmmcoz34dvkofjvpowxslh7b6ggvs+j8d0a...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Why is it so hard to get sponsors.....?
Bah, I need to read before sending. On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Paul Wise wrote: Specialization: ... Unfortunately can mean Unfortunately this can mean there are no sponsors for particular areas. Preferences: Different folks have different packaging preferences, some like cdbs, some debhelper, some dh, some yada. Your packaging choices will in part reduce the set of folks ...who will have experience with and willingness to sponsor your package. Another thing I forgot about, there are folks and teams who do not do sponsorship, but have a strong emphasis on collaboration and instead do co-maintainence or team maintainence. -- 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/CAKTje6F_-eMFkDxD+46h6mz0=p0jfbCVka2gHoZJDRZpH-5=z...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Why is it so hard to get sponsors.....?
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 11:07:11PM +, Philip Ashmore wrote: On 26/02/13 21:51, Arno Töll wrote: Hi, On 26.02.2013 22:31, W. van den Akker wrote: I understand [1] and [2]. I meant uploading to unstable and not testing. But none of the DD was ever answering the emails.. Be patient and don't give up. I know this can be frustrating and annoying, and we're slowly trying to improve the situation, but we all agree the situation is still all but optimal to sponsorees. Moreover, personally I'm always keen to hear about ideas how to improve the situation though. So let us know if you got good ideas. While harsh reality dictates that sponsors will spend their time however they wish, including only sponsoring packages that interest them or have some other relevance, True. it might be more encouraging if sponsorees could know where they stand apart from the wall of silence we have now. Also true. First - a weighted sponsorship priority queue - all packages get a rating and higher-rated packages will get sponsored sooner than others. Priorities are different per sponsor. There's no overall priority. Also, setting priorities and publishing them, costs time, in my opinion better spent on sponsoring the packages. Everyone who wants a sponsor for a package will see their package, its position in the queue, and its weighting. Your call is important to us - you are 15th in the queue is better than please hold. I agree that this would be nice for who waits for a sponsor. Second - a weighting web interface - even if a sponsor can't/wont sponsor a package they can rate it positively or negatively. This would take seconds with the right web interface, comments optional. Now that is a good idea. Voting up or down with one click costs little time. Third, unless a package reaches some negative weighting value which marks it as un-sponsor-able, it will eventually get packaged. No promises that a package will get sponsored. The ranking reflects the voting up or down, but it doesn't mean that the top package will be sponsored first. Sponsoring still depends on the individual sponsor deciding that the package is good for upload. This way, sponsors get to package what they like most of the time, with the occasional package they might prefer not to, for Debians sake. If the individual sponsors want to do this. It's still volunteering work. Regards, Bart Martens -- 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/20130227063624.gb3...@master.debian.org
Re: Why is it so hard to get sponsors.....?
I'm reminded of the metrics stuff that was discussed ages ago: https://wiki.debian.org/DebianMentorsNet#Metrics -- 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/CAKTje6H1APguHYYjvYZqRSCUegoTdTkEgJxFAOtBzZhRrh=t...@mail.gmail.com
