[pkg-go] Bug#894184: Gitea was Orphaned
As is standard golang practice, dependency ABIs were changed within a single git revision without any version bump (if any version existed at all). This situation will produce build failures from any attempt to update the package. In fact, I believe a number of dependencies have already been auto-removed from Debian because of build failures. You're argument that gogs would be better is 1) based on absolutely nothing but your own personal opinion, 2) completely and utterly irrelevant, and 3) continues proving how little you care about the DFSG. If I had continued pursuing gogs and stopped at the same point, gogs would be in exactly the same situation, facing the same problems. I did not continue packaging gogs because the owner would not accept patches/requests to fix these problems. Of course, this wouldn't be an issue for the gogs packages you (Piccoro) have created because you are in no way concerned about DFSG, CVEs, or reproducibility. (I say this after having looked at the packages you created.) As things currently sit, the gitea package and subsequent dependencies have been orphaned. My opinion is that gitea does not belong in the debian archives. Gogs has proven to be a substantially lesser candidate. In order for this bug to be resolved, someone will have to adopt the package. -- Michael Lustfield ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
[pkg-go] Bug#879791: golang-etcd-server-dev: New build dependency does not exist in Debian (golang-github-x-sys-dev)
Package: golang-etcd-server-dev Version: 3.2.9+dfsg-1 Justification: fails to build from source (but built successfully in the past) Severity: serious While attempting to do some package maintenance, I ran into the following problem: The following packages have unmet dependencies: golang-etcd-server-dev : Depends: golang-github-x-sys-dev which is a virtual package and is not provided by any available package It seems a new build dependency was added to etcd which does not currently exist in Debian. I also noticed that there are unpushed commits (pristine-tar). -- System Information: Debian Release: buster/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (900, 'testing'), (800, 'unstable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 4.11.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/16 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system) Versions of packages golang-etcd-server-dev depends on: ii dh-golang 1.23 ii golang-any 2:1.8~3 pn golang-github-bgentry-speakeasy-dev pn golang-github-boltdb-bolt-dev pn golang-github-cockroachdb-cmux-dev pn golang-github-coreos-go-semver-dev pn golang-github-coreos-go-systemd-dev pn golang-github-coreos-pkg-dev pn golang-github-dgrijalva-jwt-go-v3-dev pn golang-github-dustin-go-humanize-dev pn golang-github-ghodss-yaml-dev pn golang-github-gogo-protobuf-dev pn golang-github-golang-groupcache-dev pn golang-github-google-btree-dev pn golang-github-grpc-ecosystem-go-grpc-prom pn golang-github-grpc-ecosystem-grpc-gateway pn golang-github-jonboulle-clockwork-dev pn golang-github-kr-pty-dev pn golang-github-mattn-go-runewidth-dev pn golang-github-olekukonko-tablewriter-dev pn golang-github-prometheus-client-golang-de pn golang-github-prometheus-common-dev pn golang-github-spf13-cobra-dev pn golang-github-spf13-pflag-dev pn golang-github-ugorji-go-codec-dev pn golang-github-urfave-cli-dev pn golang-github-x-sys-dev pn golang-github-xiang90-probing-dev pn golang-golang-x-crypto-dev ii golang-golang-x-net-dev1:0.0+git20170629.c81e7f2+dfsg-1 pn golang-golang-x-time-dev pn golang-google-grpc-dev pn golang-gopkg-cheggaaa-pb.v1-dev pn golang-goprotobuf-dev pn golang-procfs-dev golang-etcd-server-dev recommends no packages. golang-etcd-server-dev suggests no packages. ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
[pkg-go] Bug#876878: (no subject)
Control: tags 876878 + fixed pending Control: owner 876878 ! I'm not sure why, but this package got dropped from unstable. Aside from buildd reporting Maybe-Failed, I'm not finding any reason for the removal. Even reproducible-builds seems happy with the last upload. Regardless, I uploaded a package that fixes this issue. Once it passes through NEW, this bug will be resolved. Once this bug is resolved and the migration happens, builds in testing will become reproducible as well. Pending: https://ftp-master.debian.org/new/golang-github-markbates-goth_1.42.0-3.html -- Michael Lustfield ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
[pkg-go] Bug#866871: (no subject)
Control: fixed 866871 golang-github-gopherjs-gopherjs/0.0~git20170702.0.2b1d432-1 ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
[pkg-go] Bug#868719: (no subject)
Control: fixed 868719 0.0~git20170713.0.8ea508f-3 This test seems to only fail in buildd. I can't reproduce it in pbuild/sbuild. I've uploaded an update that disables running tests and lets this package build. -- Michael Lustfield ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
[pkg-go] Bug#862511: (no subject)
severity 862511 wishlist thanks The package version in unstable was mistakingly upgraded to a newer version. It needed to be downgraded so a CVE fix could make it's way to testing. This package won't be updated until after freeze. -- Michael Lustfield ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
[pkg-go] Bug#832387: (no subject)
Control: tags 832387 + wontfix Without upstream making changes, this will not be resolved. Based on upstream's responses, I am adding the wontfix tag to this bug. -- Michael Lustfield ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
[pkg-go] Bug#836487: (no subject)
Control: owner 836487 ! I will complete this once #859655 has been resolved. -- Michael Lustfield ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
[pkg-go] Bug#859655: (still in progress)
Control: reopen 859655 ! This is obviously not resolved yet, but the fix is in unstable. I'm currently discussing the idea of unblocking this package and requesting nmu rebuilds. If this works out, it shouldn't take too long to get this closed. -- Michael Lustfield ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
[pkg-go] Bug#859655: (no subject)
unblock request: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=860429 (with more discussion) ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
[pkg-go] Bug#859655: (no subject)
Control: owner -1 ! I agree that this is a very long commit, but it makes only one change and it's pretty easy to follow the logic. It also offers an easy way to opt-out. Thinking about SSH, in the real world, it's typically rare that the default host key checking behavior causes problems. I don't expect this situation would be an exception, but that assumes no bugs in the checks themselves. I don't believe removal is an option, but I've also never worked with a freeze exception. To ensure this gets resolved, I will commit to doing the needful. If anyone else has more experience and wants to coach or take over, please do. A bit of a side note, this patch is included in current unstable and I'm not aware of any new reproducible build failures. I will follow up on that statement, but it at least gives me some confidence we can prevent regressions in testing. -- Michael Lustfield ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
[pkg-go] Bug#859704: (no subject)
After taking a second look, I'm assuming this report comes from reproducible builds. >From the log: Get:13 http://httpredir.debian.org/debian sid/main amd64 golang-github-syndtr-goleveldb-dev all 0.0~git20170302.0.3c5717c-2 [3790 B] This FTBFS occurs because this specific version of the packaging did not play well with dh-golang. A corrected version of this package has been uploaded and is now in unstable. I'm looking into kicking off another rebuild test and will close this if it succeeds. -- Michael Lustfield ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
[pkg-go] Bug#859704:
Thanks for reporting this error! I checked reverse deps of this build dependency, but neglected to check newer packages such as this. Hopefully this was the only package missed, but I will spend some time making sure. I'll get this bug report resolved today. ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
[pkg-go] Bug#859577:
Thanks for looking over my changes and catching this mistake! I'll get a correction uploaded today. ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
[pkg-go] Bug#840676:
Control: owner 840676 ! I ended up creating duplicate packaging and merged my changes which included a version bump. I didn't look, but remember at least some of these modifications being present in the current packaging. Sometime today, I'll take a look and see if any changes still need to be made. If not, I'll go ahead and close this bug. ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
[pkg-go] Bug#859577: (no subject)
Heh.. it seems I thought golang-goleveldb-dev was the alternate name of a different package. I'll review this and get it corrected. -- Michael Lustfield ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
[pkg-go] Bug#859256: Thanks!
Thanks for reporting this and providing a patch! Fixing now... -- Michael Lustfield ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
[pkg-go] Bug#859176: Fixed
Thanks for catching this mistake! I'm sorry it happened in the first place. I've taken a close look at every file, updated d/copyright, and pushed a correction. -- Michael Lustfield ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
[pkg-go] Bug#856615: Second Look
After taking a closer look at the source code, I believe the included Apache-2.0 reference is a mistake. The source code that is licensed with Apache-2.0 is available here: https://neil.fraser.name/software/diff_match_patch/svn/trunk/ None of this source code is present in this source code: https://github.com/sergi/go-diff Because no source code was reproduced, this is a completely unique implementation (in the Go language). I have submitted a PR with upstream to request dropping reference to the Apache-2.0 license as this implementation is otherwise correctly licensed. -- Michael Lustfield ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
[pkg-go] Bug#842435: ITP: golang-github-microcosm-cc-bluemonday -- bluemonday: a fast golang HTML sanitizer (inspired by the OWASP Java HTML Sanitizer) to scrub user generated content of XSS
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Michael Lustfield <mich...@lustfield.net> * Package name: golang-github-microcosm-cc-bluemonday Version : 0.0~git20161012.0.f77f16f-1 Upstream Author : Microcosm * URL : https://github.com/microcosm-cc/bluemonday * License : BSD-3-clause Programming Lang: Go Description : HTML sanitizer to scrub user generated content of XSS Bluemonday takes untrusted user generated content as an input and will return HTML that has been sanitised against a whitelist of approved HTML elements and attributes so that you can safely include the content in your web page. I'm packaging this library as a dependency of gogs, but this seems to be a useful and well written library for preventing XSS. ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
[pkg-go] Bug#842434: ITP: bluemonday -- bluemonday: a fast golang HTML sanitizer (inspired by the OWASP Java HTML Sanitizer) to scrub user generated content of XSS
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Michael Lustfield <mich...@lustfield.net> * Package name: bluemonday Version : 0.0~git20161012.0.f77f16f-1 Upstream Author : Microcosm * URL : https://github.com/microcosm-cc/bluemonday * License : BSD-3-clause Programming Lang: Go Description : HTML sanitizer to scrub user generated content of XSS Bluemonday takes untrusted user generated content as an input, and will return HTML that has been sanitised against a whitelist of approved HTML elements and attributes so that you can safely include the content in your web page. I'm packaging this library as a dependency of gogs, but this seems to be a useful and well written library for preventing XSS. ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
[pkg-go] Bug#842433: ITP: golang-github-gogits-cron -- a cron library for gogs
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Michael Lustfield <mich...@lustfield.net> * Package name: golang-github-gogits-cron Version : 0.0~git20160810.32.7f3990a-1 Upstream Author : Gogs * URL : https://github.com/gogits/cron * License : Expat Programming Lang: Go Description : a cron library for gogs GoDoc (http://godoc.org/github.com/robfig/cron) Build Status (https://travis-ci.org/robfig/cron) TODO: perhaps reasoning ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
[pkg-go] Bug#841279: ITP: golang-github-gogits-go-gogs-client -- Gogs API client in Go.
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Michael Lustfield <mich...@lustfield.net> * Package name: golang-github-gogits-go-gogs-client Version : 0.0~git20160830.0.d8aff57-1 Upstream Author : Gogs * URL : https://github.com/gogits/go-gogs-client * License : MIT Programming Lang: Go Description : Gogs API client in Go. Gogs API client in Go This package is still in experiment, see Wiki (https://github.com/gogits/go-gogs-client/wiki) for documentation. License This project is under the MIT License. See the LICENSE (https://github.com/gogits/gogs/blob/master/LICENSE) file for the full license text. This is being packaged as a build dependency to gogs. ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
Re: [pkg-go] ITP Gogs + Dependency Hell
Is this the wrong place to ask for help? If so, could someone please point me in the right direction? On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:31 PM, Michael Lustfield <deb...@lustfield.net> wrote: > Howdy! > > I'll start off by introducing myself! I'm MTecknology! I'm hear > because I had a goal, and I haven't lost sight of that, but I need > some help getting there. > > Gogs [1] is a tool that I personally use heavily. My entire > infrastructure is deployed and configured by changes in git. Since > gogs is one of the few tools I use that's not currently packaged in > Debian, and because I want to be more involved in Debian, this seemed > like a logical place to start. (I was wrong) > > My first topic of interest should be simple. I feel like pkg-go is an > interesting group and I'd like to contribute to it. I've played with > golang packaging up until the point of pushing things to Debian > servers. Based on my experience... > > I'd like to take on contributing to pkg-go so that the build > dependencies for gogs will exist in Debian. As part of a team, my > interests would obviously be inclined to grow. The question here > becomes, where can I find a list of expectations prior to joining this > group and how would I do that? > > The second, and directly related, topic of interest is gogs. I took > over the abandoned ITP [2] thinking it seemed relatively simple and > straight forward. I sure as crap jumped in way over my head, so now > seems like a good time to learn how to swim. :P > > While I was working through the dependency chain for gogs, I ran into > quite the clusterfuck. I'd like to assume this is normal exactly > nowhere. Please, don't tell me if I'm wrong. I've documented the > "dependency hell" in the ITP [2]. > > My first question on this topic becomes, is this even suitable for > Debian? Based on that list of dependencies, is gogs something we want > included? If so, I'd love to continue pursuing the endeavor, but I > would absolutely love to stop now if that's not the case. > > If it's decided that gogs should be included in Debian, and also > decided that I get to help push out dependencies, then I could > /really/ use a little bit of hand holding on the first couple. Some of > the issues that popped up seem pretty challenging for a novice such as > myself. Anyone willing? :) > > I have a few other questions, such as how cyclical and circular > dependencies should be handled, but those seem like "not now" > questions. > > [1] https://gogs.io/ > [2] https://bugs.debian.org/792101 > -- > Michael Lustfield ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
[pkg-go] ITP Gogs + Dependency Hell
Howdy! I'll start off by introducing myself! I'm MTecknology! I'm hear because I had a goal, and I haven't lost sight of that, but I need some help getting there. Gogs [1] is a tool that I personally use heavily. My entire infrastructure is deployed and configured by changes in git. Since gogs is one of the few tools I use that's not currently packaged in Debian, and because I want to be more involved in Debian, this seemed like a logical place to start. (I was wrong) My first topic of interest should be simple. I feel like pkg-go is an interesting group and I'd like to contribute to it. I've played with golang packaging up until the point of pushing things to Debian servers. Based on my experience... I'd like to take on contributing to pkg-go so that the build dependencies for gogs will exist in Debian. As part of a team, my interests would obviously be inclined to grow. The question here becomes, where can I find a list of expectations prior to joining this group and how would I do that? The second, and directly related, topic of interest is gogs. I took over the abandoned ITP [2] thinking it seemed relatively simple and straight forward. I sure as crap jumped in way over my head, so now seems like a good time to learn how to swim. :P While I was working through the dependency chain for gogs, I ran into quite the clusterfuck. I'd like to assume this is normal exactly nowhere. Please, don't tell me if I'm wrong. I've documented the "dependency hell" in the ITP [2]. My first question on this topic becomes, is this even suitable for Debian? Based on that list of dependencies, is gogs something we want included? If so, I'd love to continue pursuing the endeavor, but I would absolutely love to stop now if that's not the case. If it's decided that gogs should be included in Debian, and also decided that I get to help push out dependencies, then I could /really/ use a little bit of hand holding on the first couple. Some of the issues that popped up seem pretty challenging for a novice such as myself. Anyone willing? :) I have a few other questions, such as how cyclical and circular dependencies should be handled, but those seem like "not now" questions. [1] https://gogs.io/ [2] https://bugs.debian.org/792101 -- Michael Lustfield ___ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
[pkg-go] Bug#840588: ITP: golang-github-lunny-log -- A compatible log extension
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Michael Lustfield <mich...@lustfield.net>
* Package name: golang-github-lunny-log
Version : 0.0~git20160921.0.7887c61-1
Upstream Author : Lunny Xiao
* URL : https://github.com/lunny/log
* License : BSD-3-clause
Programming Lang: Go
Description : A compatible log extension
log GoDoc (https://godoc.org/github.com/lunny/log)
.
简体中文 (https://github.com/lunny/log/blob/master/README_CN.md)
Installation
.
go get github.com/lunny/log
.
Features• Add color support for unix console• Implemented dbwriter
to save log to database• Implemented FileWriter to save log to file
by date or time.• Location configurationExample For Single File: Go f,
_ := os.Create("my.log") log.Std.SetOutput(f)
.
.
For Multiple Writer: Go f, _ := os.Create("my.log")
log.Std.SetOutput(io.MultiWriter(f, os.Stdout))
.
.
For log files by date or time: Go w := log.NewFileWriter(log.FileOptions{
ByType:log.ByDay, Dir:"./logs",
}) log.Std.SetOutput(w)
.
About This repo is an extension of Golang log. LICENSE BSD License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BSD/
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BSD/)
I am packaging this as part of an ITP for gogs. This is a dependency for one of
the gogs dependencies. (and far from the only one)
___
Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
