Bug#693230: Bug#806572: RFS: multimail/0.50~20150922-1 [ITA]

[Fernando Toledo]

Hi People, i'm back (sorry i very busy with work/study) =|


On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 11:35:05 +0200 Mattia Rizzolo  wrote:
> 
> Bart Martens already changed the metadata of #693230 to match your
> intentions.

very good, thanks!

> 
> The next step for you would be to seek a sponsor to review and upload
> your package.  I'm generally happy to do that, however since this would
> be your first package in Debian I'd like to understand what is your
> knowledge of things like the BTS, what you followed (if anything) to
> work with the packaging, etc.

I'm not DD but i have some skill on packaging for Debian (not all, but
some to help me to work) :)

I was working on several packages (see pkg-* projects on github):

https://github.com/ftoledo

Also, i'm working on Huayra GNU/Linux a Debian derivated distro:

https://wiki.debian.org/Derivatives/Census/Huayra
https://github.com/HuayraLinux/
https://huayra.conectarigualdad.gob.ar

We have several customs packages and repositories too.

> 
> The fact that mentors.d.n is all green on your package is a good sign,
> but also I see you are not closing this bug report (#693230) with your
> upload, so something is missing.

i update the mentors package, now lintian says:

--
 – Package closes a ITA bug

wnpp:
#693230 (normal): ITA: multimail -- Offline reader for BW,
QWK,OMEN and SOUP
--

Is this enough, or should I add something else?

> 
> I'll be happy to review your package once you answer the above; for more
> details on my usual workflow and requirements, see
> https://people.debian.org/~mattia/sponsoring.html

I'm reading your requeriments, i hope to meet them and get the package
upload.

I am very grateful for your help!

Saludos!
-- 
Fernando Toledo
Dock Sud BBS
http://bbs.docksud.com.ar
telnet://bbs.docksud.com.ar

Bug#693230: Bug#806572: RFS: multimail/0.50~20150922-1 [ITA]

[Mattia Rizzolo]

[ dropping #806572 as that bug is closed and archived  ]

Hi,

On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 01:47:37PM -0300, Fernando Toledo wrote:
> https://github.com/ftoledo/pkg-multimail
> 
> I upload to mentors:
> https://mentors.debian.net/package/multimail
> 
> I see that the package is orphaned, i can adopt it, but i'm not DD, how
> to can i help and procced to upload to unstable?

The process to adopt a package is described here:
https://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/#howto-o

Bart Martens already changed the metadata of #693230 to match your
intentions.

The next step for you would be to seek a sponsor to review and upload
your package.  I'm generally happy to do that, however since this would
be your first package in Debian I'd like to understand what is your
knowledge of things like the BTS, what you followed (if anything) to
work with the packaging, etc.

The fact that mentors.d.n is all green on your package is a good sign,
but also I see you are not closing this bug report (#693230) with your
upload, so something is missing.

I'll be happy to review your package once you answer the above; for more
details on my usual workflow and requirements, see
https://people.debian.org/~mattia/sponsoring.html

-- 
regards,
Mattia Rizzolo

GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18  4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540  .''`.
more about me:  https://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#693230: Bug#806572: RFS: multimail/0.50~20150922-1 [ITA]

[Fernando Toledo]

Hi people!

I'm working on version 0.52

https://github.com/ftoledo/pkg-multimail

I upload to mentors:
https://mentors.debian.net/package/multimail

I see that the package is orphaned, i can adopt it, but i'm not DD, how
to can i help and procced to upload to unstable?

Thanks!

-- 
Fernando Toledo
Dock Sud BBS
http://bbs.docksud.com.ar
telnet://bbs.docksud.com.ar



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#693230: Bug#806572: RFS: multimail/0.50~20150922-1 [ITA]

[Mattia Rizzolo]

Hi Robert!

On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 03:52:07PM -0500, Robert James Clay wrote:
>I'm afraid that I got rather heavily tied up in other things and so 
> haven't 
> been able to work on this as much as I'd like...  Should I perhaps 
> temporarily 
> close the RFS bug and reopen it when I have an updated version of the package 
> done and uploaded to mentors?  (Note that the next package update will also 
> include a new snapshot.)

Givent that I received no follow up on this, I'm closing this RFS
ticket.  Feel free to either open a new one once you start again working
on this, or continue directly with Tobi in the ITA bug, or anything you
like.

-- 
regards,
Mattia Rizzolo

GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18  4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540  .''`.
more about me:  https://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#693230: Bug#806572: RFS: multimail/0.50~20150922-1 [ITA]

[Mattia Rizzolo]

On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 03:52:07PM -0500, Robert James Clay wrote:
>I'm afraid that I got rather heavily tied up in other things and so 
> haven't 
> been able to work on this as much as I'd like...

life sometimes gets in the middle of this, yeah...

> Should I perhaps temporarily 
> close the RFS bug and reopen it when I have an updated version of the package 
> done and uploaded to mentors?

Also consider that mentors.d.n deletes packages which haven't seen
updates in a good while, and a script turns the ITPs without activities
in 6 months to RFS.  If you are going to pause the work for, say, more
than 2 months, I'd find closing this RFS and getting it off the queue a
kind and gentle action, otherwise feel free to keep it open, is not that
annoying :)

Thanks for replying and making us aware of the current state!
-- 
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#693230: Bug#806572: RFS: multimail/0.50~20150922-1 [ITA]

[Robert James Clay]

Hi Mattia!

On Wednesday, March 02, 2016 01:16:20 PM Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 09, 2016 at 10:38:47AM -0500, Robert James Clay wrote:
> > Hi Tobias!
> > 
> > On Thursday, January 07, 2016 05:54:29 AM Tobias Frost wrote:
> > > On Tue, 05 Jan 2016 18:08:55 -0500 Robert James Clay 
> > > 
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, January 05, 2016 04:27:48 AM Tobias Frost wrote:
> [ anticipation of work that will be done... ]
> 
> How's going with this?

   I'm afraid that I got rather heavily tied up in other things and so haven't 
been able to work on this as much as I'd like...  Should I perhaps temporarily 
close the RFS bug and reopen it when I have an updated version of the package 
done and uploaded to mentors?  (Note that the next package update will also 
include a new snapshot.)


> Several weeks passed and we haven't heard back from you, this is just a
> gentle ping :)

   And I appreciate that!





RJ Clay
j...@rocasa.us

Bug#693230: Bug#806572: RFS: multimail/0.50~20150922-1 [ITA]

[Mattia Rizzolo]

Hi Robert!

On Sat, Jan 09, 2016 at 10:38:47AM -0500, Robert James Clay wrote:
> Hi Tobias!
> 
> On Thursday, January 07, 2016 05:54:29 AM Tobias Frost wrote:
>  
> > On Tue, 05 Jan 2016 18:08:55 -0500 Robert James Clay 
> > wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, January 05, 2016 04:27:48 AM Tobias Frost wrote:
[ anticipation of work that will be done... ]

How's going with this?
Several weeks passed and we haven't heard back from you, this is just a
gentle ping :)


-- 
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#693230: Bug#806572: RFS: multimail/0.50~20150922-1 [ITA]

[Robert James Clay]

Hi Tobias!

On Thursday, January 07, 2016 05:54:29 AM Tobias Frost wrote:
 
> On Tue, 05 Jan 2016 18:08:55 -0500 Robert James Clay 
> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, January 05, 2016 04:27:48 AM Tobias Frost wrote:
> > > - Is the patch forwarded to upstream?
> > 
> >The non vendor specific parts of it, you mean?  I plan to further
> > discuss other aspects of it with him, yes...  I have provided him
> > with the results of package builds but he hasn't commented...
> 
> The Makefile looks buggy to me, not vendor-specific: Hardcoded paths
> are bad. But ok, a patch will do it for now. However, please then set
> the patch headers appropiately, especially the Forwarded one with (if
> available) a link to more information. 

  I'll be discussing that with the author, but in the mean time will see about 
updating the patch headers more appropriately.



> > > - d/rules: Are the lines setting CPPFLAGS and friend really needed?
> > 
> >As I recall, those were needed to clean up the hardening related
> lintian errors.
> 
> With debhelper 9 and compat 9 this is no longer needed.

According to my notes, I was still seeing hardening related errors, after 
changing the debhelper version to 9.  I'll investigate that again.


> 
> You can cleanup your d/rules even more: This is enough:
> 
> #!/usr/bin/make -f
> 
> %:
> dh $@

   I'll be looking into how it might be reduced to that, although there is at 
least one thing I'd want to keep...


> 
> Why: 
> - the dh_installchangelogs --keep HISTORY is not needed, Debian users
> know that they have to look on changelog.gz

 And those already familiar with the application (but not necessarily Debian) 
would expect to see the HISTORY file, so I'd rather keep that.  (It only adds a 
sym link after all...)


> - dh_installdocs --link-doc=multimail just adds complexity, saving
> maybwe 10k.

   And not really needed any longer, when the dbgsym package is being used.   
I'll take care of that


> - dh_auto_install --destdir=debian/multimail destdir is automatically
> figured out by dh_auto_install. 

   I'll check into that as well, as I don't recall why I explicitly still had 
that set.


> 
> d/copyright:

   I'll investigate the issues you raised regarding the debian/copyright file 
and resolve as necessary.






RJ Clay
j...@rocasa.us