Re: please avoid writing useless/annoying stuff in debian/gbp.conf (was: source only upload with git-buildpackage)

2019-11-10 Thread Thomas Goirand
On 11/11/19 1:02 AM, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 11:20:45PM +0100, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>>
>> Please, *never* do that. It's generally a very bad idea to write
>> anything to debian/gbp.conf. It's as if you were adding your text editor
>> preferences in the package. Instead, please prefer writing in ~/.gbp.conf.
> 
> I keep most of my git-buildpackage settings which are specific to my
> developer environment in ~/.gbp.conf.  However, there are some gbp
> settings which are specific to the repository set up, and those I
> think, IMHO, *are* appropriate for debian/gbp.conf.  For example:
> 
> [DEFAULT]
> pristine-tar = True
> upstream-tag='v%(version)s'
> debian-branch=debian/master

The first 2, yes. The last one, it's my opinion that it's useless, and
that you only need it because "ignore-branch = True" isn't the default
in git-buildpackage. It's ok as long as you always keep the same
packagig branch, but if, like in my team, we need a new branch name
every 6 months, and for 400+ repositories, then keeping the branch name
declared in debian/gbp.conf becomes super annoying (as it forces one to
change the "debian-branch" each time).

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)



Bug#916202: ITP: golang-github-mmarkdown-mmark -- Mmark: a powerful markdown processor in Go geared towards the IETF

2019-11-10 Thread Anthony Fok
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Anthony Fok 
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian...@lists.debian.org

* Package name: golang-github-mmarkdown-mmark
  Version : 2.2.0-1
  Upstream Author : Miek Gieben
* URL : https://github.com/mmarkdown/mmark
* License : BSD-2-Clause
  Programming Lang: Go
  Description : Mmark: a powerful markdown processor in Go geared towards 
the IETF

Rationale: There has been interests to see Mmark v2.0.0 packaged.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: please avoid writing useless/annoying stuff in debian/gbp.conf (was: source only upload with git-buildpackage)

2019-11-10 Thread Theodore Y. Ts'o
On Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 11:20:45PM +0100, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> 
> Please, *never* do that. It's generally a very bad idea to write
> anything to debian/gbp.conf. It's as if you were adding your text editor
> preferences in the package. Instead, please prefer writing in ~/.gbp.conf.

I keep most of my git-buildpackage settings which are specific to my
developer environment in ~/.gbp.conf.  However, there are some gbp
settings which are specific to the repository set up, and those I
think, IMHO, *are* appropriate for debian/gbp.conf.  For example:

[DEFAULT]
pristine-tar = True
upstream-tag='v%(version)s'
debian-branch=debian/master

If you are going to be cloning the e2fsprogs repository and wanting to
use gbp-buildpackage, you *will* want to use these settings, and
putting them in ~/.gbp.conf doesn't work well, since they won't apply
for all packages that they might want to build.

Regards,

- Ted



Re: please avoid writing useless/annoying stuff in debian/gbp.conf (was: source only upload with git-buildpackage)

2019-11-10 Thread Thomas Goirand
On 10/5/19 7:48 PM, Attila Szalay wrote:
> I added the "pbuilder-options = --source-only-changes" option to the
> [buildpackage] part of the debian/gbp.conf

Please, *never* do that. It's generally a very bad idea to write
anything to debian/gbp.conf. It's as if you were adding your text editor
preferences in the package. Instead, please prefer writing in ~/.gbp.conf.

Just an example: if someone is using pbuilder, and wants to add a new
binary to your package, then your debian/gbp.conf will be super
annoying, because in such case, we need to upload *with* binaries (as
source-only uploads aren't possible in the NEW queue).

Also, please remember that not everyone is using git-buildpackage, and
that nobody is ever, forced to do so, even when using git for packaging
(just calling plain sbuild works perfectly, for example).

A few years ago, we decided to *completely* remove all traces of
debian/gbp.conf inside the OpenStack team, and I very much enjoy this
choice. The only annoying bit, is that now, everyone *must* write in
~/.gbp.conf this:

[DEFAULT]
ignore-branch = True

By the way, it'd be nice if it became the default in git-buildpackage.
This missleads everyone into writing a debian/gbp.conf just in order to
tell git-buildpackage what branch to build with.

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)



Checksum validation of images and packages

2019-11-10 Thread burak sarac
Hello,
 I wrote a tool for checksum validation, which is located here:
https://github.com/getsumio/getsum

 Currently I am hunting feed-backs, idea is you have remotely deploy
servers in several zones and a scheduler run i.e. daily basis 'getsum
-remoteOnly http://example.com/file expectedSum' against those servers and
collect feedback.
 Project is very young also my first golang app but I believe I have
finished fair part of application:) and I am planning to actively maintain.
  I was wondering if you see a use case here or give me some feedback:)

Thank you & have a nice week
Burak


Re: Usage of DEP5

2019-11-10 Thread Daniel Leidert
Am Donnerstag, den 07.11.2019, 13:40 + schrieb Thorsten Glaser:

[snip]
> If forcing machine-readable copyright is required for UMEGAYA,
> then I’m sorry to say I will be removing debian/upstream/metadata
> from some of my packages rather.

Why is a machine-readable debian/copyright (DEP5, accepted) mixed with
debian/upstream/metadata (DEP12, just a draft) here?

debian/upstream/metadata is completely optional. This draft has not even been
accepted yet. I see heavy issues making this mandatory. It contains almost only
non-packaging relevant information, which is not really necessary to provide
that package. And the data contained can change at any time.

But if we don't ship the projects license(s) files, debian/copyright IS
mandatory. JFTR: I don't understand why a formalized format of debian/copyright
is that hard to realize.

Regards, Daniel




signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Bug#944471: ITP: ccv -- C-based Computer Vision Library

2019-11-10 Thread Mo Zhou
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Mo Zhou 

* Package name: ccv
  Version : x.y.z
  Upstream Author : Name 
* URL : https://github.com/liuliu/ccv
* License : BSD-3
  Programming Lang: C
  Description : C-based Computer Vision Library

OpenCV dropped support for their C interface. Maybe some users
will use this one in their C project instead.



Bug#944463: ITP: golang-github-gofrs-uuid -- short description

2019-11-10 Thread Dmitry Smirnov
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Dmitry Smirnov 
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, 
pkg-go-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Control: block 902677 by -1

   Package name: golang-github-gofrs-uuid
Version: 3.2.0
Upstream Author: Maxim Bublis
License: Expat
URL: https://github.com/gofrs/uuid
Vcs-Browser: 
https://salsa.debian.org/go-team/packages/golang-github-gofrs-uuid
Description: UUID library for Golang
 This library provides a pure Golang implementation of Universally Unique
 Identifiers (UUID) variant as defined in RFC-4122. This package supports
 both the creation and parsing of UUIDs in different formats.
 .
 The library supports the following UUID versions:
  * Version 1, based on timestamp and MAC address (RFC-4122)
  * Version 2, based on timestamp, MAC address and POSIX UID/GID (DCE 1.1)
  * Version 3, based on MD5 hashing of a named value (RFC-4122)
  * Version 4, based on random numbers (RFC-4122)
  * Version 5, based on SHA-1 hashing of a named value (RFC-4122)


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.