Re: Call for review: Improving RFS template for mentors.debian.net
Hi, Here is the current status about this thread: I had fixed pull requests [1][2] with feedback from this mailing list, but not merged yet. [1] Support mailto for RFS template https://github.com/debexpo/debexpo/pull/35 Status: waiting for review by @paulproteus [2] Collect 'QA upload.' information by debianqa plugin https://github.com/debexpo/debexpo/pull/42 Status: waiting for review I had proposed migration to jessie [3], but there is no progress for it. [3] Migrate development environment to jessie https://github.com/debexpo/debexpo/pull/40 Status: waiting for review I had proposed to add worker status page [4], just waiting for review. [4] Add status page which shows each cron job status https://github.com/debexpo/debexpo/pull/45 Status: waiting for review On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 6:28 PM, HAYASHI Kentarowrote: > > Hi, all > > About 2 month ago, I wrote a small patch for mentors.debian.net (debexpo) > > Here is the actual pull request for it. > https://github.com/debexpo/debexpo/pull/35 -- Kentaro Hayashi
Re: Call for review: Improving RFS template for mentors.debian.net
Hi, On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 7:12 AM, Jakub Wilkwrote: > > * Gianfranco Costamagna , 2016-07-14, 22:06: >>> >>> Typo: >>> an QA upload -> an QA upload >> >> I fail to see differences... >> did you mean "a QA upload"? > > > Oops. I meant: > > an QA upload -> a QA upload Thank you for feedback. I also can't find difference too. :-P Anyway, I've fixed a typo in PR. -- Kentaro Hayashi
Re: Call for review: Improving RFS template for mentors.debian.net
* Gianfranco Costamagna, 2016-07-14, 22:06: Typo: an QA upload -> an QA upload I fail to see differences... did you mean "a QA upload"? Oops. I meant: an QA upload -> a QA upload -- Jakub Wilk
Re: Call for review: Improving RFS template for mentors.debian.net
Hi Jakub >Typo: >an QA upload -> an QA upload I fail to see differences... did you mean "a QA upload"? /me is not really sure about the correct wording :) G.
Re: Call for review: Improving RFS template for mentors.debian.net
* HAYASHI Kentaro, 2016-07-11, 23:07: Collect 'QA upload.' information by debianqa plugin https://github.com/debexpo/debexpo/pull/42 [...] As you suggested, it is simple to check Maintainer field. I got it. Thank you for feedback! Typo: an QA upload -> an QA upload You can find misspellings like this using anorack: http://jwilk.net/software/anorack -- Jakub Wilk
Re: Call for review: Improving RFS template for mentors.debian.net
On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 10:23 PM, Jakub Wilkwrote: >>> Collect 'QA upload.' information by debianqa plugin >>> https://github.com/debexpo/debexpo/pull/42 > > Um, that's... unusual way to search for a string. Have you tried using regular expressions? :) > > Or alternatively, it might be simpler to look at the Maintainer field. The e-mail address should be packa...@qa.debian.org for all QA uploads. Hi, As you suggested, it is simple to check Maintainer field. I got it. Thank you for feedback! > P.S. Does anyone knows the way to check [RC] case easily - the package contains fixed RC bugs > > debexpo already knows about bugs the upload would close and their severities. For example https://mentors.debian.net/package/aspell-sk reads: > Ah, I found that I had better to look into closedbugs plugin, Thanks! -- Kentaro Hayashi
Re: Call for review: Improving RFS template for mentors.debian.net
HI, >>Thank you for feedback. >>But I hadn't ever seen such tag. >>https://mentors.debian.net/sponsor/rfs-howto > >There's no standard tag for this, and I don't think we need one. > >If there's no tag in the subject, then the upload is supposed to be >"regular". I bet to disagree sir :) I personally think no tag might mean - missing tag - user forgot it - regular upload. Sometimes I like being explicit rather than implicit. And I saw people using [update] [package refresh] [regular update] tags. I personally prefer an "Update" tag, rather than having users guess/invent new words for something that is regular [1]. (I probably wont continue this discussion, I don't have a strong enough opinion here, the above is all I can think/say on the matter ;) ) [1] https://xkcd.com/927
Re: Call for review: Improving RFS template for mentors.debian.net
* HAYASHI Kentaro, 2016-07-10, 06:13: Collect 'QA upload.' information by debianqa plugin https://github.com/debexpo/debexpo/pull/42 Um, that's... unusual way to search for a string. Have you tried using regular expressions? :) Or alternatively, it might be simpler to look at the Maintainer field. The e-mail address should be packa...@qa.debian.org for all QA uploads. P.S. Does anyone knows the way to check [RC] case easily - the package contains fixed RC bugs debexpo already knows about bugs the upload would close and their severities. For example https://mentors.debian.net/package/aspell-sk reads: | Package closes bugs | |aspell-sk: |#603719 (normal): Please update package aspell-sk |src:aspell-sk: |#817360 (serious): aspell-sk: Removal of debhelper compat 4 -- Jakub Wilk
Re: Call for review: Improving RFS template for mentors.debian.net
Hello, On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 06:13:03AM +0900, HAYASHI Kentaro wrote: > P.S. Does anyone knows the way to check [RC] case easily - the package > contains > fixed RC bugs > usually listed Closes:# in debian/changelog? Yes: I think that's the only way you can find out. -- Sean Whitton
Re: Call for review: Improving RFS template for mentors.debian.net
On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 6:13 AM, Jakub Wilkwrote: > > * HAYASHI Kentaro , 2016-07-10, 00:00: This PR is written to solve some glitches about RFS template. >>> >>> another feature request: >>> the template has also the subject, e.g. >>> ITP, NMU, RC, QA, and so on, but there seems to be one missing entry for "regular update" >> >> >> Thank you for feedback. >> But I hadn't ever seen such tag. >> https://mentors.debian.net/sponsor/rfs-howto > > > There's no standard tag for this, and I don't think we need one. > > If there's no tag in the subject, then the upload is supposed to be "regular". > > -- > Jakub Wilk > Thank you for explanation. I got it. :-) -- Kentaro Hayashi
Re: Call for review: Improving RFS template for mentors.debian.net
* HAYASHI Kentaro, 2016-07-10, 00:00: This PR is written to solve some glitches about RFS template. another feature request: the template has also the subject, e.g. ITP, NMU, RC, QA, and so on, but there seems to be one missing entry for "regular update" Thank you for feedback. But I hadn't ever seen such tag. https://mentors.debian.net/sponsor/rfs-howto There's no standard tag for this, and I don't think we need one. If there's no tag in the subject, then the upload is supposed to be "regular". -- Jakub Wilk
Re: Call for review: Improving RFS template for mentors.debian.net
Hi, On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 5:47 AM, HAYASHI Kentarowrote: > > Hi, > > On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 6:48 PM, Gianfranco Costamagna < locutusofb...@debian.org> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > >This PR is written to solve some glitches about RFS template. > > > > another feature request: > > the template has also the subject, e.g. > > ITP, NMU, RC, QA, and so on, but there seems to be one missing entry for > > "regular update" > > To fill in subject correctly, it needs to collect more information by plugin. > In such purpose, existing debianqa plugin should be fixed, so I've send another PR. > > Collect 'QA upload.' information by debianqa plugin > https://github.com/debexpo/debexpo/pull/42 With a bit more additional fix, now it can fill in subject: foobar [ITP] and severity: wishlist and so on. https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/225841/16710249/eeeb7b82-4662-11e6-9895-c8bd352cc6c8.png P.S. Does anyone knows the way to check [RC] case easily - the package contains fixed RC bugs usually listed Closes:# in debian/changelog? -- Kentaro Hayashi
Re: Call for review: Improving RFS template for mentors.debian.net
Hi, On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 6:48 PM, Gianfranco Costamagna < locutusofb...@debian.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > >This PR is written to solve some glitches about RFS template. > > another feature request: > the template has also the subject, e.g. > ITP, NMU, RC, QA, and so on, but there seems to be one missing entry for > "regular update" To fill in subject correctly, it needs to collect more information by plugin. In such purpose, existing debianqa plugin should be fixed, so I've send another PR. Collect 'QA upload.' information by debianqa plugin https://github.com/debexpo/debexpo/pull/42
Re: Call for review: Improving RFS template for mentors.debian.net
Hi, On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Jakub Wilkwrote: > > * HAYASHI Kentaro , 2016-07-08, 18:28: >> >> https://github.com/debexpo/debexpo/pull/35 > > > Not a regression, but instead of: > > "upstreams web site" > > it should be: > > "upstream's web site" > I've send it as another PR https://github.com/debexpo/debexpo/pull/41 Thanks! -- Kentaro Hayashi
Re: Call for review: Improving RFS template for mentors.debian.net
Hi, On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 6:48 PM, Gianfranco Costamagna < locutusofb...@debian.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > >This PR is written to solve some glitches about RFS template. > another feature request: > the template has also the subject, e.g. > ITP, NMU, RC, QA, and so on, but there seems to be one missing entry for > "regular update" Thank you for feedback. But I hadn't ever seen such tag. https://mentors.debian.net/sponsor/rfs-howto Is it officially supposed to use (undocumented?) or just one idea as a sponsor? -- Kentaro Hayashi
Re: Call for review: Improving RFS template for mentors.debian.net
Hi, >On >Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 09:48:18AM +, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: >> Or to see if the changelog contains only one single entry (but this isn't >> error-prone >> because many people are bumping changelog without having it uploaded yet) > >What did you have in mind here? rmadison $package if the package is not in experimental, check for version to be -1 and one single entry >> and also a pull-debian-source for the source, and a debdiff between >> them might *really* simplify the sponsors work!> >That would be great. the idea is stolen from Ubuntu :) G.
Re: Call for review: Improving RFS template for mentors.debian.net
Hello, Thank you for your patience with trying to improve mentors, Kentaro :) On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 09:48:18AM +, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > Or to see if the changelog contains only one single entry (but this isn't > error-prone > because many people are bumping changelog without having it uploaded yet) What did you have in mind here? > and also a pull-debian-source for the source, and a debdiff between > them might *really* simplify the sponsors work! That would be great. -- Sean Whitton
Re: Call for review: Improving RFS template for mentors.debian.net
* HAYASHI Kentaro, 2016-07-08, 18:28: https://github.com/debexpo/debexpo/pull/35 Not a regression, but instead of: "upstreams web site" it should be: "upstream's web site" or maybe: "upstream web site" Perhaps also s/web site/website/. -- Jakub Wilk
Re: Call for review: Improving RFS template for mentors.debian.net
Hi, >This PR is written to solve some glitches about RFS template. another feature request: the template has also the subject, e.g. ITP, NMU, RC, QA, and so on, but there seems to be one missing entry for "regular update" it would be nice to use rmadison to see if the package is already on unstable/experimental (or pull-debian-source) and set "update" accordingly. Or to see if the changelog contains only one single entry (but this isn't error-prone because many people are bumping changelog without having it uploaded yet) and also a pull-debian-source for the source, and a debdiff between them might *really* simplify the sponsors work! Gianfranco
Call for review: Improving RFS template for mentors.debian.net
Hi, all About 2 month ago, I wrote a small patch for mentors.debian.net (debexpo) Here is the actual pull request for it. https://github.com/debexpo/debexpo/pull/35 This PR is written to solve some glitches about RFS template. I'm happy if this PR is merged because it is useful for user of mentors.d.n Screenshot shows what I really want to improve it: https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/225841/16355705/783ffcec-3afa-11e6-8d8e-a69aedce152a.png Here is the detail about above PR. It improves the following situation. Before: * Do not just copy RFS template and send it because there are still 2 spaces left. (We need to recall that this is command mail!) * There are many "fill in ...", for example, upstream author, license, url, package name, recent changelog and so on. After: * Just click mailto: link for it * Filled in more entry by fetching information from debian/control or debian/changelog and so on. @paulproteus who is a one of developer of debexpo - said that he would review it, but I guess that he is very busy and can't afford to review it. NOTE: It requires python-debian 0.1.23 or later. wheezy provides python-debian 0.1.21, so It seems that package upgrade is needed on mentors.d.n. (jessie provides python-debian 0.1.27) -- Kentaro Hayashi