Re: RFS: dsbltesters
отправлено в группы и по почте Christoph Haas wrote: - Please close the WNPP bug 273204 which you opened yourself one and a half year ago. Ok, i'll close it. I assumed though that ITP should be closed after that the package was become ready and was appeared in the pool. I'm i wrong? Please use the debian/changelog to close it. http://www.de.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/ch-pkgs.en.html#s-upload-bugfix Yes, that's better. - The copyright file should contain the years of copyright. Ok, i'll fix that. BTW i see many copyright files in Debian packages whitout (c)year lines. Is it actually a violation? http://groups.google.de/group/linux.debian.announce.devel/browse_frm/thread/ee00935883c7bec2/5326ec35388edb3c IMHO, the Debian Policy really should be more exacting. - There has been long time no change. Did you contact the upstream to make sure the software is still maintained? This piece of software is developed and distributed by dsbl.org project which acts as great free network service. I have no doubt, the software is pretty _useful_ as one of methods to open proxy/relay reliable testing and it's included in FreeBSD ports collection. Should i care if it wasn't updated for 2 years? The main concern is that security bugs may come up. And in that case the upstream should jump in quickly and help to fix it. If the upstream software became unmaintained then the situation may lead to the removal of the package. It's okay if the last update is a year ago. I just wanted to make sure you talked to the upstream at least once. Waiting for the answer. - The package is not lintian clean. Three issues there. Do you mean issues above or something other? I saw only one: $ lintian dsbltesters_0.9.5-1.dsc W: dsbltesters source: out-of-date-standards-version 3.6.1 I got these messages: W: dsbltesters source: out-of-date-standards-version 3.6.1 E: dsbltesters: file-in-etc-not-marked-as-conffile /etc/dsbl.conf W: dsbltesters: old-fsf-address-in-copyright-file Could you be so kind to check dsbltesters_0.9.5-2? Just did. Still not lintian clean. Did you use a current Sid (unstable) installation to build the package? These are the remaning messages: E: dsbltesters: file-in-etc-not-marked-as-conffile /etc/dsbl.conf W: dsbltesters: old-fsf-address-in-copyright-file Please make sure your package are lintian-clean. Hmm... The history follows. I made built package checks under my usual system (testing), and now i see that it should be produced in pbuilder environment. I just added linda- and lintian-hooks to pbuilder (DISTRIBUTION=testing). They reports: Setting up linda (0.3.17) ... Linda: Running as root, dropping to nobody. E: dsbltesters; dsbl.conf is in /etc, but not marked as a conffile. Setting up lintian (1.23.14) ... E: dsbltesters: file-in-etc-not-marked-as-conffile /etc/dsbl.conf W: dsbltesters: old-fsf-address-in-copyright-file To me, it's a kind of magic, because i use up-to-date etch system and certanly same linda/lintian versions as for pbuilder environment. How come the difference? Anyway, now, pbuilder environment was upgraded for sid and next release should be lintian-clean. Be so nice, look at dsbl-testers_0.9.5-3... -- Regards, Al Nikolov JID [EMAIL PROTECTED]IRC clown UIN 312108671 PGP 4B50 F1E3 080C 21A2 91F4 8BF0 CD60 3B5A 2ECF 984B -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: dsbltesters
Christoph Haas wrote: I'd be generally willing to sponsor it, but... Thanks anyway. - Please close the WNPP bug 273204 which you opened yourself one and a half year ago. Ok, i'll close it. I assumed though that ITP should be closed after that the package was become ready and was appeared in the pool. I'm i wrong? - Please use the current standards version. No problem, i'll fix that. - The copyright file should contain the years of copyright. Ok, i'll fix that. BTW i see many copyright files in Debian packages whitout (c)year lines. Is it actually a violation? - There has been long time no change. Did you contact the upstream to make sure the software is still maintained? This piece of software is developed and distributed by dsbl.org project which acts as great free network service. I have no doubt, the software is pretty _useful_ as one of methods to open proxy/relay reliable testing and it's included in FreeBSD ports collection. Should i care if it wasn't updated for 2 years? I maintain an another package (proxycheck) which do almost the same and it also stays without aggressive development. IMHO, such a nature of the object: most of open proxies/relays are usual MUAs, HTTP servers and other well-known services in well-known insecure states. There is not so many news from the battlefield. Anyway, i've asked upstream about the software status. - Installing the README file doesn't seem to add any value for the end-user. Ok, i'll remove it. I assumed that README.Debian is the right place to point on specific build options. Debian includes needed development libraries, but the easiest way to debianize this software was just to link it against the supplied versions. Should i emphasize that somewhere? - The upstream tarball I just fetched from the web site has another md5 checksum than the orig.tar.gz you provide. How come? At a first diff -r glance the two files have many differences. $ md5sum dsbltesters_0.9.5.orig.tar.gz dsbl-testers-0.9.5.tar.gz 55285009d90914048df2f62f4c9525d8 dsbltesters_0.9.5.orig.tar.gz 55285009d90914048df2f62f4c9525d8 dsbl-testers-0.9.5.tar.gz For me, they are identical. Perhaps, you've downloaded by mistake dsbl-0.9.5.tar.gz which is server software. - The package is not lintian clean. Three issues there. Do you mean issues above or something other? I saw only one: $ lintian dsbltesters_0.9.5-1.dsc W: dsbltesters source: out-of-date-standards-version 3.6.1 Could you be so kind to check dsbltesters_0.9.5-2? -- Regards, Al Nikolov JID [EMAIL PROTECTED]IRC clown UIN 312108671 PGP 4B50 F1E3 080C 21A2 91F4 8BF0 CD60 3B5A 2ECF 984B -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: dsbltesters
On 2006-01-26, Al Nikolov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I assumed though that ITP should be closed after that the package was become ready and was appeared in the pool. I'm i wrong? It should be closed in the changelog. Then it will automagically be closed when package get build. /Sune Vice President of packaging kommando -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: dsbltesters
On Thursday 26 January 2006 21:18, Al Nikolov wrote: Christoph Haas wrote: - Please close the WNPP bug 273204 which you opened yourself one and a half year ago. Ok, i'll close it. I assumed though that ITP should be closed after that the package was become ready and was appeared in the pool. I'm i wrong? Please use the debian/changelog to close it. http://www.de.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/ch-pkgs.en.html#s-upload-bugfix - The copyright file should contain the years of copyright. Ok, i'll fix that. BTW i see many copyright files in Debian packages whitout (c)year lines. Is it actually a violation? http://groups.google.de/group/linux.debian.announce.devel/browse_frm/thread/ee00935883c7bec2/5326ec35388edb3c - There has been long time no change. Did you contact the upstream to make sure the software is still maintained? This piece of software is developed and distributed by dsbl.org project which acts as great free network service. I have no doubt, the software is pretty _useful_ as one of methods to open proxy/relay reliable testing and it's included in FreeBSD ports collection. Should i care if it wasn't updated for 2 years? The main concern is that security bugs may come up. And in that case the upstream should jump in quickly and help to fix it. If the upstream software became unmaintained then the situation may lead to the removal of the package. It's okay if the last update is a year ago. I just wanted to make sure you talked to the upstream at least once. - Installing the README file doesn't seem to add any value for the end-user. Ok, i'll remove it. I assumed that README.Debian is the right place to point on specific build options. Debian includes needed development libraries, but the easiest way to debianize this software was just to link it against the supplied versions. Should i emphasize that somewhere? The README.Debian provides additional information for end users on how to use the software. Say the package installs some binaries then the user should start by reading the README.Debian to understand how to use the package. That README.Debian should not be used to tell how your package works internally or which options you used to build it. That's not relevant for the end user. - The upstream tarball I just fetched from the web site has another md5 checksum than the orig.tar.gz you provide. How come? At a first diff -r glance the two files have many differences. $ md5sum dsbltesters_0.9.5.orig.tar.gz dsbl-testers-0.9.5.tar.gz 55285009d90914048df2f62f4c9525d8 dsbltesters_0.9.5.orig.tar.gz 55285009d90914048df2f62f4c9525d8 dsbl-testers-0.9.5.tar.gz For me, they are identical. Perhaps, you've downloaded by mistake dsbl-0.9.5.tar.gz which is server software. You are right. My mistake. Awkward... :) - The package is not lintian clean. Three issues there. Do you mean issues above or something other? I saw only one: $ lintian dsbltesters_0.9.5-1.dsc W: dsbltesters source: out-of-date-standards-version 3.6.1 I got these messages: W: dsbltesters source: out-of-date-standards-version 3.6.1 E: dsbltesters: file-in-etc-not-marked-as-conffile /etc/dsbl.conf W: dsbltesters: old-fsf-address-in-copyright-file Could you be so kind to check dsbltesters_0.9.5-2? Just did. Still not lintian clean. Did you use a current Sid (unstable) installation to build the package? These are the remaning messages: E: dsbltesters: file-in-etc-not-marked-as-conffile /etc/dsbl.conf W: dsbltesters: old-fsf-address-in-copyright-file Please make sure your package are lintian-clean. Christoph -- Never trust a system administrator who wears a tie and suit. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RFS: dsbltesters
Package: dsbltesters Description: open proxy/relay testing utilities License: GPL URL: http://dsbl.org/programs Upstream Authors: Rik van Riel, Ian Gulliver, Ron Guilmette, Fred Smith This package contains testing software configured to work with the DSBL (http://dsbl.org/) or DSBL-compliant services. It enables you to send tests to servers based on spam that you receive. If those tests succeed, the results will reach the DSBL host in question, and the relay will be listed. It can be downloaded from: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/dsbltesters/ -- Regards, Al Nikolov JID [EMAIL PROTECTED]IRC clown UIN 312108671 PGP 4B50 F1E3 080C 21A2 91F4 8BF0 CD60 3B5A 2ECF 984B -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: dsbltesters
On Wednesday 25 January 2006 14:10, Al Nikolov wrote: Package: dsbltesters Description: open proxy/relay testing utilities License: GPL URL: http://dsbl.org/programs Upstream Authors: Rik van Riel, Ian Gulliver, Ron Guilmette, Fred Smith This package contains testing software configured to work with the DSBL (http://dsbl.org/) or DSBL-compliant services. It enables you to send tests to servers based on spam that you receive. If those tests succeed, the results will reach the DSBL host in question, and the relay will be listed. It can be downloaded from: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/dsbltesters/ I'd be generally willing to sponsor it, but... - Please close the WNPP bug 273204 which you opened yourself one and a half year ago. - Please use the current standards version. - The copyright file should contain the years of copyright. - There has been long time no change. Did you contact the upstream to make sure the software is still maintained? - Installing the README file doesn't seem to add any value for the end-user. - The upstream tarball I just fetched from the web site has another md5 checksum than the orig.tar.gz you provide. How come? At a first diff -r glance the two files have many differences. - The package is not lintian clean. Three issues there. Please fix that first. Kindly Christoph -- Never trust a system administrator who wears a tie and suit. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RFS: dsbltesters - open proxy/relay testing utilities
Hi, all Seeking for sponsorship for the package (ITP: 273204) Package: dsbltesters Version: 0.9.5-1 Section: net Priority: optional Description: open proxy/relay testing utilities This package contains testing software configured to work with the DSBL (http://dsbl.org/) or DSBL-compliant services. It enables you to send tests to servers based on spam that you receive. If those tests succeed, the results will reach the DSBL host in question, and the relay will be listed. -- Regards, Al Nikolov JID [EMAIL PROTECTED]IRC clown UIN 312108671 PGP 4B50 F1E3 080C 21A2 91F4 8BF0 CD60 3B5A 2ECF 984B -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: dsbltesters - open proxy/relay testing utilities
On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 08:16:19PM +0300, Al Nikolov wrote: Hi, all Seeking for sponsorship for the package (ITP: 273204) Where can one find the package to download and test? Package: dsbltesters Version: 0.9.5-1 Section: net Priority: optional Description: open proxy/relay testing utilities This package contains testing software configured to work with the DSBL (http://dsbl.org/) or DSBL-compliant services. It enables you to send tests to servers based on spam that you receive. If those tests succeed, the results will reach the DSBL host in question, and the relay will be listed. I think the long description could use some work; if I understand correctly, Tests SMTP servers for opened proxy/relay based on email received and listed as spam. Unsecured and abusive hosts can be reported to DBSL-style blacklists (http://dsbl.org). -- Clear skies, Justin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
