Bug#595609: unblock: mailgraph/1.14-3
On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 14:17:52 +0200, Julien Valroff wrote: I attach a diff to update the Finnish Debconf translation. I have also changed the maintainer field to myself (I have taken over the package). diffstat output: changelog |7 +++ control |2 +- po/fi.po | 21 +++-- 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) Is it ok to upload it to t-p-u? Yes. If so, am I allowed to do it as a DM (the DM-Upload-Allowed field is set in the version currently in sid, but not in testing). Dunno, try it and see? Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#595609: unblock: mailgraph/1.14-3
Le lundi 01 nov. 2010 à 19:30:16 (+0100), Julien Cristau a écrit : On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 14:17:52 +0200, Julien Valroff wrote: I attach a diff to update the Finnish Debconf translation. I have also changed the maintainer field to myself (I have taken over the package). diffstat output: changelog |7 +++ control |2 +- po/fi.po | 21 +++-- 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) Is it ok to upload it to t-p-u? Yes. Thanks. If so, am I allowed to do it as a DM (the DM-Upload-Allowed field is set in the version currently in sid, but not in testing). Dunno, try it and see? The upoad was just accepted. As it is an arch=all package, I guess you can already approve the upload? Cheers, Julien -- Julien Valroff jul...@kirya.net http://www.kirya.net GPG key: 4096R/258E26B1 E1D8 5796 8214 4687 E416 948C 859F EF67 258E 26B1 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#595609: unblock: mailgraph/1.14-3
Le lundi 01 nov. 2010 à 20:13:31 (+0100), Julien Cristau a écrit : On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 20:05:52 +0100, Julien Valroff wrote: Le lundi 01 nov. 2010 à 19:30:16 (+0100), Julien Cristau a écrit : On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 14:17:52 +0200, Julien Valroff wrote: I attach a diff to update the Finnish Debconf translation. I have also changed the maintainer field to myself (I have taken over the package). diffstat output: changelog |7 +++ control |2 +- po/fi.po | 21 +++-- 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) Is it ok to upload it to t-p-u? Yes. Thanks. If so, am I allowed to do it as a DM (the DM-Upload-Allowed field is set in the version currently in sid, but not in testing). Dunno, try it and see? The upoad was just accepted. As it is an arch=all package, I guess you can already approve the upload? Approved. Many thanks. The changelog closes the wrong bug though. The translation update was sent in private, no bug needs to be closed, As this upload cancels the need to unblock mailgraph, I have closed the original unblock request in the changelog. Cheers, Julien -- Julien Valroff jul...@kirya.net http://www.kirya.net GPG key: 4096R/258E26B1 E1D8 5796 8214 4687 E416 948C 859F EF67 258E 26B1 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#595609: unblock: mailgraph/1.14-3
Hi, Le dimanche 26 sept. 2010 à 14:10:11 (+0200), Julien Cristau a écrit : On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 14:04:09 +0200, Christian PERRIER wrote: Quoting Julien Valroff (jul...@kirya.net): How should I number the updated 1.14-1.4? Should it be uploaded to testing-proposed-updates, am I right? I'd say 1.14-1.4squeeze1 and, yes, upload to t-p-u (let's have confirmation from Julien Cristau, though) Can we see a proposed diff for this, if you still want to update mailgraph in squeeze? I attach a diff to update the Finnish Debconf translation. I have also changed the maintainer field to myself (I have taken over the package). diffstat output: changelog |7 +++ control |2 +- po/fi.po | 21 +++-- 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) Is it ok to upload it to t-p-u? If so, am I allowed to do it as a DM (the DM-Upload-Allowed field is set in the version currently in sid, but not in testing). Cheers, Julien -- Julien Valroff jul...@kirya.net http://www.kirya.net GPG key: 1024D/9F71D449 17F4 93D8 746F F011 B845 9F91 210B F2AB 9F71 D449 diff -u mailgraph-1.14/debian/changelog mailgraph-1.14/debian/changelog --- mailgraph-1.14/debian/changelog +++ mailgraph-1.14/debian/changelog @@ -1,3 +1,10 @@ +mailgraph (1.14-1.4squeeze1) testing-proposed-updates; urgency=low + + * Change maintainer field to myself + * Update Finnish Debconf translation (Esko Arajärvi) (Closes: #595609) + + -- Julien Valroff jul...@kirya.net Sat, 23 Oct 2010 14:11:22 +0200 + mailgraph (1.14-1.4) unstable; urgency=low * Non-maintainer upload. diff -u mailgraph-1.14/debian/control mailgraph-1.14/debian/control --- mailgraph-1.14/debian/control +++ mailgraph-1.14/debian/control @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ Source: mailgraph Section: admin Priority: extra -Maintainer: Norbert Tretkowski no...@debian.org +Maintainer: Julien Valroff jul...@kirya.net Build-Depends: debhelper (= 7), dpatch, po-debconf Standards-Version: 3.7.2.2 diff -u mailgraph-1.14/debian/po/fi.po mailgraph-1.14/debian/po/fi.po --- mailgraph-1.14/debian/po/fi.po +++ mailgraph-1.14/debian/po/fi.po @@ -4,17 +4,15 @@ Project-Id-Version: mailgraph\n Report-Msgid-Bugs-To: no...@debian.org\n POT-Creation-Date: 2006-11-14 23:38+0100\n -PO-Revision-Date: 2010-01-09 21:50+0200\n +PO-Revision-Date: 2010-10-23 12:45+0300\n Last-Translator: Esko Arajärvi e...@iki.fi\n -Language-Team: Finnish debian-l10n-finn...@lists.debian.org\n +Language-Team: debian-10n-finn...@lists.debian.org\n Language: fi\n MIME-Version: 1.0\n Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8\n Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit\n -X-Poedit-Language: Finnish\n -X-Poedit-Country: FINLAND\n -X-Generator: Lokalize 1.0\n Plural-Forms: nplurals=2; plural=(n != 1);\n +X-Generator: Virtaal 0.6.1\n #. Type: boolean #. Description @@ -60,24 +58,19 @@ #. Description #: ../templates:3001 msgid Count incoming mail as outgoing mail? -msgstr +msgstr Lasketaanko tulevat viestit lähtevinä? #. Type: boolean #. Description #: ../templates:3001 -#, fuzzy -#| msgid -#| When using a content filter like amavis, incoming mail is counted more -#| than once, which will result in wrong values. If you use some content -#| filter, you should choose this option. msgid If you count incoming mail as outgoing mail (default), mail is counted more than once if you use content filters like amavis, so you'll get wrong values. If you're using some content filter, disable this. msgstr -Käytettäessä sisältösuodattimia kuten amavis, tulevat viestit lasketaan -useammin kuin kerran ja tulokset vääristyvät. Valitse tämä vaihtoehto, jos -käytössä on jokin sisältösuodatin. +Jos käytössä on sisältösuodattimia kuten amavis ja tulevat viestit lasketaan +lähtevinä, viestit lasketaan useammin kuin kerran ja tulokset vääristyvät. +Älä valitse tätä, jos käytössä on jokin sisältösuodatin. #~ msgid Ignore mail to/from localhost? #~ msgstr Jätetäänkö paikalliset viestit huomiotta? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#595609: unblock: mailgraph/1.14-3
Hi, Le samedi 02 oct. 2010 à 09:35:34 (+0200), Christian PERRIER a écrit : Quoting Julien Valroff (jul...@kirya.net): I must admit I am not sure what to do to fix the situation. Should I ask to the translators to update their translations for the templates currently in testing? You certainly can, yes. You can use podebconf-report-po and adapt the message to explain translators that, even though their translations are complete in unstable, your need is to update them in testing. I have received no answer to my call for translation. The current state is however good: all languages are fully translated except fi.po for which I have contacted the last translator without answer. I hence think this bug can be closed, do you agree? Cheers, Julien -- Julien Valroff jul...@kirya.net http://www.kirya.net GPG key: 1024D/9F71D449 17F4 93D8 746F F011 B845 9F91 210B F2AB 9F71 D449 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#595609: unblock: mailgraph/1.14-3
Quoting Julien Valroff (jul...@kirya.net): Hi, Le samedi 02 oct. 2010 à 09:35:34 (+0200), Christian PERRIER a écrit : Quoting Julien Valroff (jul...@kirya.net): I must admit I am not sure what to do to fix the situation. Should I ask to the translators to update their translations for the templates currently in testing? You certainly can, yes. You can use podebconf-report-po and adapt the message to explain translators that, even though their translations are complete in unstable, your need is to update them in testing. I have received no answer to my call for translation. Ah, that happens. Let me see if my 7 languages that are target for 100% are there In unstable, we have incomplete Russian and Swedish. Are they complete in testing? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#595609: unblock: mailgraph/1.14-3
Le dimanche 17 oct. 2010 à 18:14:23 (+0200), Christian PERRIER a écrit : Quoting Julien Valroff (jul...@kirya.net): Hi, Le samedi 02 oct. 2010 à 09:35:34 (+0200), Christian PERRIER a écrit : Quoting Julien Valroff (jul...@kirya.net): I must admit I am not sure what to do to fix the situation. Should I ask to the translators to update their translations for the templates currently in testing? You certainly can, yes. You can use podebconf-report-po and adapt the message to explain translators that, even though their translations are complete in unstable, your need is to update them in testing. I have received no answer to my call for translation. Ah, that happens. Let me see if my 7 languages that are target for 100% are there In unstable, we have incomplete Russian and Swedish. I'll upload immediately the updated package following to your translation update call. Are they complete in testing? Yes, only Finnish is incomplete in testing, though other languages might need some polishing. here are the complete stats: cs.po 7 translated messages. da.po 7 translated messages. de.po 7 translated messages. es.po 7 translated messages. eu.po 7 translated messages. fi.po 5 translated messages, 1 fuzzy translation, 1 untranslated message. fr.po 7 translated messages. gl.po 7 translated messages. it.po 7 translated messages. ja.po 7 translated messages. nb.po 7 translated messages. nl.po 7 translated messages. pt.po 7 translated messages. pt_BR.po 7 translated messages. ru.po 7 translated messages. sk.po 7 translated messages. sv.po 7 translated messages. vi.po 7 translated messages. Cheers, Julien -- Julien Valroff jul...@kirya.net http://www.kirya.net GPG key: 1024D/9F71D449 17F4 93D8 746F F011 B845 9F91 210B F2AB 9F71 D449 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#595609: unblock: mailgraph/1.14-3
Quoting Julien Valroff (jul...@kirya.net): I must admit I am not sure what to do to fix the situation. Should I ask to the translators to update their translations for the templates currently in testing? You certainly can, yes. You can use podebconf-report-po and adapt the message to explain translators that, even though their translations are complete in unstable, your need is to update them in testing. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#595609: unblock: mailgraph/1.14-3
Le samedi 02 oct. 2010 à 09:35:34 (+0200), Christian PERRIER a écrit : Quoting Julien Valroff (jul...@kirya.net): I must admit I am not sure what to do to fix the situation. Should I ask to the translators to update their translations for the templates currently in testing? You certainly can, yes. You can use podebconf-report-po and adapt the message to explain translators that, even though their translations are complete in unstable, your need is to update them in testing. OK, will do this today so that I can have their updated translations ready ASAP. Cheers, Julien -- Julien Valroff jul...@kirya.net http://www.kirya.net GPG key: 1024D/9F71D449 17F4 93D8 746F F011 B845 9F91 210B F2AB 9F71 D449 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#595609: unblock: mailgraph/1.14-3
Hi, Le dimanche 26 sept. 2010 à 14:10:11 (+0200), Julien Cristau a écrit : On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 14:04:09 +0200, Christian PERRIER wrote: Quoting Julien Valroff (jul...@kirya.net): How should I number the updated 1.14-1.4? Should it be uploaded to testing-proposed-updates, am I right? I'd say 1.14-1.4squeeze1 and, yes, upload to t-p-u (let's have confirmation from Julien Cristau, though) Can we see a proposed diff for this, if you still want to update mailgraph in squeeze? After checking the situation, I have a new problem: after taking over mailgraph, I have changed a debconf template, which means all new translations are not suitable for the old version of the package now in Squeeeze. Translations made for this amended template however also contains improvements of the old translations for some languages. I must admit I am not sure what to do to fix the situation. Should I ask to the translators to update their translations for the templates currently in testing? Christian, what do you think? I do not want to make the translators loose their time… Cheers, Julien -- Julien Valroff jul...@kirya.net http://www.kirya.net GPG key: 1024D/9F71D449 17F4 93D8 746F F011 B845 9F91 210B F2AB 9F71 D449 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#595609: unblock: mailgraph/1.14-3
On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 14:04:09 +0200, Christian PERRIER wrote: Quoting Julien Valroff (jul...@kirya.net): How should I number the updated 1.14-1.4? Should it be uploaded to testing-proposed-updates, am I right? I'd say 1.14-1.4squeeze1 and, yes, upload to t-p-u (let's have confirmation from Julien Cristau, though) Can we see a proposed diff for this, if you still want to update mailgraph in squeeze? Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#595609: unblock: mailgraph/1.14-3
Hi, Le lundi 06 sept. 2010 à 20:23:42 (+0200), Julien Cristau a écrit : Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2010 20:23:42 +0200 From: Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org To: Christian PERRIER bubu...@debian.org, 595...@bugs.debian.org Cc: Julien Valroff jul...@kirya.net Subject: Re: Bug#595609: unblock: mailgraph/1.14-3 On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 15:13:10 +0200, Christian PERRIER wrote: Julien (Cristau), what if Julien V. does this? Would the package be OK for an unblock? I'm just going through the changelog, not looking at the actual changes: [...] The rest would depend on the specifics, but basically for anything that's not necessary to fix an important bug (or translation/documentation updates) it's too late. Then, I propose to integrate latest translation updates to the version currently in testing (1.14-1.4), and upload a version to unstable re- integrating changes made by Christian in his last 2 NMU's. How should I number the updated 1.14-1.4? Should it be uploaded to testing-proposed-updates, am I right? Cheers, Julien -- Julien Valroff jul...@kirya.net http://www.kirya.net GPG key: 1024D/9F71D449 17F4 93D8 746F F011 B845 9F91 210B F2AB 9F71 D449 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#595609: unblock: mailgraph/1.14-3
Quoting Julien Valroff (jul...@kirya.net): How should I number the updated 1.14-1.4? Should it be uploaded to testing-proposed-updates, am I right? I'd say 1.14-1.4squeeze1 and, yes, upload to t-p-u (let's have confirmation from Julien Cristau, though) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#595609: unblock: mailgraph/1.14-3
On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 15:13:10 +0200, Christian PERRIER wrote: Julien (Cristau), what if Julien V. does this? Would the package be OK for an unblock? I'm just going through the changelog, not looking at the actual changes: + * Bump debhelper compat to 7 no + * Switched from dpatch to quilt no + * Convert to 3.0 (quilt) format no + * Use dh minimal rules no + * Complete rewrite of the postinst script +(Closes: #513634, #337923, #283664, #343726) no + * Rewrite of the init script using lsb functions: no The rest would depend on the specifics, but basically for anything that's not necessary to fix an important bug (or translation/documentation updates) it's too late. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#595609: unblock: mailgraph/1.14-3
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: freeze-exception Please unblock package mailgraph testing has 1.14-1. It should indeed have 1.14-2 as I, as sponsor, am the one and only culprit for missing the freeze date. I built and uploaded the package on request of its maintainer, but I did not check that it properly reached the archive. Then I forgot about all this until the maintainer pinged me again. I uploadedbut that was just after the freeze. 1.14-2 was a huge packaging change and cleaning after Julien Valroff took the package over. I reviewed most of the changes and found them suitable for release (moreover, I always find that having packaging that the new maintainer is comfortable with is much better for a package). So, though it may fail to the release criteria, particularly as they ar enow, I'd suggest unblocking this package 1.14-3 just added a few translation updates to 1.14-2 unblock mailgraph/1.14-3 -- System Information: Debian Release: squeeze/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5-686 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#595609: unblock: mailgraph/1.14-3
On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 13:12:18 +0200, Christian Perrier wrote: Please unblock package mailgraph It looks like this reverts the 1.14-1.3 and 1.14-1.4 NMUs? Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#595609: unblock: mailgraph/1.14-3
Quoting Julien Cristau (jcris...@debian.org): On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 13:12:18 +0200, Christian Perrier wrote: Please unblock package mailgraph It looks like this reverts the 1.14-1.3 and 1.14-1.4 NMUs? That's correct, nice catch... :-( Julien (Valroff), would you mind preparing a new version of the mailgraph package that would include diffs for these NMU which I did before you took the package over? Julien (Cristau), what if Julien V. does this? Would the package be OK for an unblock? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#595609: unblock: mailgraph/1.14-3
Le dimanche 05 sept. 2010 à 15:13:10 (+0200), Christian PERRIER a écrit : Date: Sun, 5 Sep 2010 15:13:10 +0200 From: Christian PERRIER bubu...@debian.org To: Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org, 595...@bugs.debian.org Cc: Julien Valroff jul...@kirya.net Subject: Re: Bug#595609: unblock: mailgraph/1.14-3 Quoting Julien Cristau (jcris...@debian.org): On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 13:12:18 +0200, Christian Perrier wrote: Please unblock package mailgraph It looks like this reverts the 1.14-1.3 and 1.14-1.4 NMUs? That's correct, nice catch... :-( My bad! I was working on this package for some time and haven't noticed these NMU's - I guess I had forgotten to subscribe to the package on the PTS. Julien (Valroff), would you mind preparing a new version of the mailgraph package that would include diffs for these NMU which I did before you took the package over? Do you mind explaining what you expect from me exactly? I had already applied some of the fixes introduced in your patches (but not all). I think the best is to make a new 1.14-4 package, including all the changes which weren't already applied and which are still applicable (I see for example a German translation which has been updated since then). Do you agree with this or is there a common procedure in such case? Julien (Cristau), what if Julien V. does this? Would the package be OK for an unblock? I also have made further changes since then, including i10n, but also fixing a potential RC bug (the postinst script currently modifies a conffile). Here is the current changelog: * Recommend apache2 instead of apache * Add the CSS directly into the CGI script (Closes: #513527) * Update debconf templates translations: + de - thanks to Martin Eberhard Schauer (Closes: #593570) + it - thanks to Luca Monducci (Closes: #593719) * Add versioned pre-dependency on debconf * Use ucf to deal with conffile (thanks to Matthijs Möhlmann) Maybe the fix for #513527 is not suitable for unblock, what do you think? I can revert it if needed. Cheers, Julien -- Julien Valroff jul...@kirya.net http://www.kirya.net GPG key: 1024D/9F71D449 17F4 93D8 746F F011 B845 9F91 210B F2AB 9F71 D449 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#595609: unblock: mailgraph/1.14-3
Quoting Julien Valroff (jul...@kirya.net): Do you mind explaining what you expect from me exactly? I had already applied some of the fixes introduced in your patches (but not all). I think the best is to make a new 1.14-4 package, including all the changes which weren't already applied and which are still applicable (I see for example a German translation which has been updated since then). Do you agree with this or is there a common procedure in such case? Whatever way you do it, the point is getting back the changes I did in my two NMUs..:-). They are mostly translation updates. Julien (Cristau), what if Julien V. does this? Would the package be OK for an unblock? I also have made further changes since then, including i10n, but also fixing a potential RC bug (the postinst script currently modifies a conffile). Here is the current changelog: * Recommend apache2 instead of apache * Add the CSS directly into the CGI script (Closes: #513527) * Update debconf templates translations: + de - thanks to Martin Eberhard Schauer (Closes: #593570) + it - thanks to Luca Monducci (Closes: #593719) * Add versioned pre-dependency on debconf * Use ucf to deal with conffile (thanks to Matthijs Möhlmann) Maybe the fix for #513527 is not suitable for unblock, what do you think? I can revert it if needed. Well, it's better to first have an advice by the release team about the changes you applied when you took the package over. Most of them are packaging cleaning, etc. which are theoretically unsuitable for unblocks (but they were at least prepared and tested before the freeze...only my slowlyness to apply them has been the cause of these changes being blocked. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
