Bug#806301: RFS: libechonest/2.3.1-0.1 [NMU] -- library for communicating with The Echo Nest platform

[Thomas Pierson]

Hi Gianfranco, Stefan,

Gianfranco Costamagna  a écrit :
>Built, don't forget next time to put a link to where
>the original maintainer
>acked the upload, and also you can consider using -1 as Debian
>revision, and maybe add a 
>"Team Upload" (dch --team), if the maintainer is aware of the changes

It must be a standard NMU because like you said: there is no official link or 
signed message from me that ack or review the changes. I'm not in a position of 
reviewing a package or signing something. (I'm in vacation on a sailboat on the 
middle of the atlantic ocean.)
So I just give my permission for a NMU to Stefan if he found a sponsor for 
reviewing his changes and made an upload.

>Dear Thomas, since you are the maintainer I'm ccing you to this email,
>to let you aware of the upload in new queue.

Thanks for that.

>If you don't like the changes, or you want to perform a different
>upload, please let me know, and I'll ask
>to remove from new queue and wait for your package.
>(and please answer to the bugs against the package :) )

I'm still agree for this NMU but beware: I did not review the changes of Stefan 
in detail but I suppose you did before signing and uploading it in the archive.

>Stefan Ahlers  ha scritto:
>I've rebuilt clementine against libechonest2.3 locally. Everything
>works
>fine for me. No changes are needed on the clementine package.

Thank you Stefan for testing and taking care of Clementine and libechonest.
Thank you Gianfranco for this NMU.

Regards,

Thomas Pierson

Bug#806301: RFS: libechonest/2.3.1-0.1 [NMU] -- library for communicating with The Echo Nest platform

[Gianfranco Costamagna]

Hi Thomas


>It must be a standard NMU because like you said: there is no official link or 
>signed message from me that ack or review the changes. I'm not in a position 
>of >reviewing a package or signing something. (I'm in vacation on a sailboat 
>on the middle of the atlantic ocean.)
>So I just give my permission for a NMU to Stefan if he found a sponsor for 
>reviewing his changes and made an upload.


wonderful, take care of your vacation :)
>Thanks for that.


you are welcome!
>I'm still agree for this NMU but beware: I did not review the changes of 
>Stefan in detail but I suppose you did before signing and uploading it in the 
>archive.


yes, when I sign with my key I'm so pedantic about changes (this doesn't mean I 
can't do mistakes, but if you look at -mentors
you will hardly find an upload where I didn't make a deep review of the 
packaging)

>Thank you Stefan for testing and taking care of Clementine and libechonest.
>Thank you Gianfranco for this NMU.


thanks to you for allowing it in the first place

(well, I could have tested the symbols in a porter machine, but I wasn't 
honestly aware of this arm* delta, and honestly I wasn't aware of dpkg 1.18 not 
available
on buildd machines, so some uploads were good, but only where a recent enough 
dpkg was available (*outside* the chroot, not inside).

sorry for that!

cheers,

Gianfranco

Bug#806301: RFS: libechonest/2.3.1-0.1 [NMU] -- library for communicating with The Echo Nest platform

[Stefan Ahlers]

Hi,

thank you for your help. I'd checked different methods for the symbol
files and I think I found a good one.
I'm using the options "(arch-bits=32) (arch-bits=64)" to separate them.
Thank you for your hint!

This should work for all builds, which were failed to build.

But I have two questions for now. Which version scheme shell I use?
libechonest/2.3.1-0.2 or libechonest/2.3.1-1?

Furthermore it seems someone dislike the using of transitional package
(see #807507).
What should I do? Deleting the transitional package or not?

Stefan

Bug#806301: RFS: libechonest/2.3.1-0.1 [NMU] -- library for communicating with The Echo Nest platform

[Stefan Ahlers]

Hi,

> it is fine 0.2 to keep it similar to before
> true story, please delete it and upload on mentors!

ok, done!

Stefan

Bug#806301: RFS: libechonest/2.3.1-0.1 [NMU] -- library for communicating with The Echo Nest platform

[Gianfranco Costamagna]

Hi,


>thank you for your help. I'd checked different methods for the symbol
>files and I think I found a good one.
>I'm using the options "(arch-bits=32) (arch-bits=64)" to separate them.
>Thank you for your hint!


wonderful
>This should work for all builds, which were failed to build.


sure, let's see
>But I have two questions for now. Which version scheme shell I use?
>libechonest/2.3.1-0.2 or libechonest/2.3.1-1?


it is fine 0.2 to keep it similar to before
>Furthermore it seems someone dislike the using of transitional package
>(see #807507).
>What should I do? Deleting the transitional package or not?


true story, please delete it and upload on mentors!

cheers,

G.

Bug#806301: RFS: libechonest/2.3.1-0.1 [NMU] -- library for communicating with The Echo Nest platform

[Gianfranco Costamagna]

done :)

thanks for your contribution to Debian!

cheers,

G.




Il Giovedì 10 Dicembre 2015 12:57, Stefan Ahlers  ha 
scritto:

Hi,

> it is fine 0.2 to keep it similar to before
> true story, please delete it and upload on mentors!

ok, done!

Stefan

Bug#806301: RFS: libechonest/2.3.1-0.1 [NMU] -- library for communicating with The Echo Nest platform

[Stefan Ahlers]

Hi,

> Built, don't forget next time to put a link to where
the original maintainer
> acked the upload, and also you can consider using -1 as Debian
revision, and maybe add a
> "Team Upload" (dch --team), if the maintainer is aware of the changes

Thank you for signing and uploding! I read the article about
"Non-maintainer upload" (https://wiki.debian.org/NonMaintainerUpload)
and I thought it is correct to use -0.1. 

> Now Stefan as soon as the package is accepted you will need to fix the
build failures (if any), and ask for a rebuild binNMU of the reverse
dependencies

I asked for a rebuild (#807509). I hope this is the correct way.

It looks like some 64bit-based builds failed
(https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=libechonest) because of
incorrect symbol files. There are six symbols, which are different on
32bit and 64bit platforms.

What is the best way of writing the symbol files? One file for every
architecture or is there a way to combine this in one or two symbol files?

Kind regards,
Stefan Ahlers

Bug#806301: RFS: libechonest/2.3.1-0.1 [NMU] -- library for communicating with The Echo Nest platform

[Gianfranco Costamagna]

Hi again I'm not sure but nmu applies more when the maintainer didn't ack an 
upload.
If the maintainer is aware and saw the changes a team upload seems more 
approproate, specially when probably the maintainer (dm) wan't able to upload 
without a sponsor...
But YMMV

For the symbols issue,  does this help? Qt packages is where I look when i feel 
lost in this jungle
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=791485

(Next time better ask a binNMU after the package is built everywhere)
Cheers,
G

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android 
 
  On Wed, 9 Dec, 2015 at 23:04, Stefan Ahlers wrote:   
Hi,

> Built, don't forget next time to put a link to where
the original maintainer
> acked the upload, and also you can consider using -1 as Debian
revision, and maybe add a
> "Team Upload" (dch --team), if the maintainer is aware of the changes

Thank you for signing and uploding! I read the article about
"Non-maintainer upload" (https://wiki.debian.org/NonMaintainerUpload)
and I thought it is correct to use -0.1. 

> Now Stefan as soon as the package is accepted you will need to fix the
build failures (if any), and ask for a rebuild binNMU of the reverse
dependencies

I asked for a rebuild (#807509). I hope this is the correct way.

It looks like some 64bit-based builds failed
(https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=libechonest) because of
incorrect symbol files. There are six symbols, which are different on
32bit and 64bit platforms.

What is the best way of writing the symbol files? One file for every
architecture or is there a way to combine this in one or two symbol files?

Kind regards,
Stefan Ahlers
  

Bug#806301: RFS: libechonest/2.3.1-0.1 [NMU] -- library for communicating with The Echo Nest platform

[Mattia Rizzolo]

[ please, can you avoid top posting and split the lines at a sane
width? ]

On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 11:44:47PM +, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
> Hi again I'm not sure but nmu applies more when the maintainer didn't
> ack an upload.
> If the maintainer is aware and saw the changes a team upload seems
> more approproate, specially when probably the maintainer (dm) wan't
> able to upload without a sponsor...
> But YMMV

From my (little) experience those uploads are usually NMU with

  * Non-maintainer upload, with maintainer permission

or something like that.
Not that I care that much anyway.

-- 
regards,
Mattia Rizzolo

GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18  4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540  .''`.
more about me:  http://mapreri.org  : :'  :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri  `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia  `-


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Bug#806301: RFS: libechonest/2.3.1-0.1 [NMU] -- library for communicating with The Echo Nest platform

[Gianfranco Costamagna]

Hi Stefan,
The best thing about open source isthat when you have a problem you sleep 
alittle and when you wake up somebody fixedit for you :)
https://launchpadlibrarian.net/229562183/libechonest_2.3.1-0.1_2.3.1-0.1ubuntu1.diff.gz
you can apply this debdiff and copy the files for the other Debian architecture 
that have failed (alpha kfreebsd-amd64 mips64el ppc64 sparc64)
I can probably try sh4 in a porterbox if needed (and if a porterbox is 
available).Otherwise if have a way to mark the architectures inside or the 
symbols as optional I guess it will be fine anyway 
Cheers
G 
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android 
 
  On Wed, 9 Dec, 2015 at 23:09, Stefan Ahlers wrote:   
Hi,

> Built, don't forget next time to put a link to where
the original maintainer
> acked the upload, and also you can consider using -1 as Debian
revision, and maybe add a
> "Team Upload" (dch --team), if the maintainer is aware of the changes

Thank you for signing and uploding! I read the article about
"Non-maintainer upload" (https://wiki.debian.org/NonMaintainerUpload)
and I thought it is correct to use -0.1. 

> Now Stefan as soon as the package is accepted you will need to fix the
build failures (if any), and ask for a rebuild binNMU of the reverse
dependencies

I asked for a rebuild (#807509). I hope this is the correct way.

It looks like some 64bit-based builds failed
(https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=libechonest) because of
incorrect symbol files. There are six symbols, which are different on
32bit and 64bit platforms.

What is the best way of writing the symbol files? One file for every
architecture or is there a way to combine this in one or two symbol files?

Kind regards,
Stefan Ahlers
  

Bug#806301: RFS: libechonest/2.3.1-0.1 [NMU] -- library for communicating with The Echo Nest platform

[Gianfranco Costamagna]

I would like to, but yahoo mail adds extra spaces and renoves good ones 
(talking about the android client)
Sorry for that

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android 
 
  On Thu, 10 Dec, 2015 at 1:14, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:   [ 
please, can you avoid top posting and split the lines at a sane
width? ]
On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 11:44:47PM +, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
> Hi again I'm not sure but nmu applies more when the maintainer didn't
> ack an upload.
> If the maintainer is aware and saw the changes a team upload seems
> more approproate, specially when probably the maintainer (dm) wan't
> able to upload without a sponsor...
> But YMMV

>From my (little) experience those uploads are usually NMU with

  * Non-maintainer upload, with maintainer permission

or something like that.
Not that I care that much anyway.

-- 
regards,
                        Mattia Rizzolo

GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18  4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540      .''`.
more about me:  http://mapreri.org                             : :'  :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri                 `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia  `-  

Bug#806301: RFS: libechonest/2.3.1-0.1 [NMU] -- library for communicating with The Echo Nest platform

[Stefan Ahlers]

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal 

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "libechonest"

 * Package name: libechonest
   Version : 2.3.1-0.1
   Upstream Author : [fill in name and email of upstream]
 * URL : 
https://projects.kde.org/projects/playground/libs/libechonest
 * License : GPL-2.0+
   Section : libs

It builds those binary packages:

 libechonest-dbg - Qt4 library for The Echo Nest platform - debug files
 libechonest-dev - Qt4 library for The Echo Nest platform - development files
 libechonest2.1 - transitional dummy package
 libechonest2.3 - Qt4 library for communicating with The Echo Nest platform
 libechonest5-2.3 - Qt5 library for communicating with The Echo Nest platform
 libechonest5-dbg - Qt5 library for The Echo Nest platform - debug files
 libechonest5-dev - Qt5 library for The Echo Nest platform - development files

To access further information about this package, please visit the following 
URL:

  http://mentors.debian.net/package/libechonest

Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

  dget -x 
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libe/libechonest/libechonest_2.3.1-0.1.dsc

Changes since the last upload:

  * Non-maintainer upload.
  * New Upstream Release (Closes: #766594)
  * Better multiarch support
  * Start Qt5 support
  * Fix installation of pkgconfig files (Closes: #794811)

This is a Non Maintainer Upload (NMU), which is allowed by the actual 
maintainer, Thomas Pierson. 

Because of the version change, all packages which depend on libechonest have to 
be rebuild against libechonest2.3. 
This affects clementine (https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/clementine).

Regards,
  Stefan Ahlers

Bug#806301: RFS: libechonest/2.3.1-0.1 [NMU] -- library for communicating with The Echo Nest platform

[Stefan Ahlers]

Hi,

I've rebuilt clementine against libechonest2.3 locally. Everything works
fine for me. No changes are needed on the clementine package.

Regards,
Stefan Ahlers